1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “C”) is a corporation established on May 9, 201 for the purpose of entrusted meal service business, etc., and the total number of issued stocks is 3000 shares, and its capital is 30 million won.

B. The register of shareholders of C is listed as shareholders of 1,800 shares, D 900 shares, and E as shareholders of 300 shares with respect to 3,00 shares issued.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff constituted C on May 9, 201 as a sole investment.

At the time, three or more shareholders were required for the incorporation of a corporation, so the plaintiff made a title trust of 1,800 shares to the defendant, who is an employee of C, and 900 shares to D, and 300 shares to E.

On February 2, 2016, the Plaintiff: “The shares trusted in the name of the Defendant are owned by the Plaintiff; if the Defendant raises an objection, the submission of documentary evidence by February 12, 2016 is demanded; however, the Defendant did not submit documentary evidence within the said period.”

Although the Plaintiff terminated the above title trust contract, the Defendant is dissatisfied with its attribution. Therefore, the Plaintiff seeks confirmation on the fact that 1,800 shares listed in the attached list in the Defendant’s name are owned by the Plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. A person registered as a shareholder in the register of shareholders is presumed to be a shareholder of the company, and in order to reverse this, the person bears the burden of proving the denial of shareholder's rights.

In order to assert that the name of a shareholder in the register of shareholders was trusted and that there was a separate shareholder in substance as the name borrower, the party asserting such title trust relationship must prove the fact of borrowing the name.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Da27755 Decided September 6, 2007, and Supreme Court Decision 2014Da53745 Decided August 29, 2016, etc.) B.

The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each statement of Nos. 1, 4, 5-1, 5-8, and Eul Nos. 11 through 17.

1 Before establishment of C.