1. Shares 800 shares in Defendant B among registered common shares of KRW 10,000 in face value issued by Defendant D Co., Ltd.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the former representative director of Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”). Defendant B is the former auditor of Defendant Co., Ltd., and Defendant C is the former director of Defendant Co., Ltd.

B. From October 200, the Plaintiff respectively held title trust of 1,300 shares of the Defendant Company to E and F, and around October 14, 2002, Defendant B and C owned 1,300 shares of the Defendant Company, respectively.

C. After that, the Plaintiff transferred 500 shares out of 1,300 shares of the Defendant Company, which was held in title by Defendant B around December 2014, to G, and completed the transfer process.

The Plaintiff notified Defendant B and C that the above title trust agreement was terminated upon the service of the duplicate of the instant complaint.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 2 through 4 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. According to the determination on the cause of the claim, the title trust agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B was lawfully terminated on November 11, 2015, when the duplicate of the complaint of this case was delivered to Defendant B, and the title trust agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant C was lawfully terminated on November 13, 2015, when the duplicate of the complaint of this case was delivered to Defendant C. As such, among the shares issued by the Defendant Company, the shares in the name of the Defendant B were 800 shares and shares in the name of Defendant C, and shares 1,300 shares in the name of Defendant C among the shares issued by the Defendant Company, and the Defendant Company is obligated to implement the transfer procedure by changing the name of the shareholder on the register of shareholders to the Plaintiff

B. Defendant B and C’s assertion, in accordance with the legal principles of title trust, asserted that even if the Plaintiff was a shareholder right holder, the above Defendants could not comply with the Plaintiff’s claim because they were the Defendant B and C’s shareholder rights. However, as seen earlier, the title trust agreement between the Plaintiff, Defendant B and C is a duplicate of the instant complaint.