All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal by plaintiffs B, C, and D are assessed against the above plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal by the plaintiff B, C, and D, the court below prepared a statement on February 7, 2006 that "F shall give up the defendant's shares to N" on N, but at that time, F did not acquire the defendant's shares, and F acquired 15,00 shares, but did not transfer them to N., the court below rejected the above plaintiffs' assertion on the premise that N acquired 15,00 shares of the defendant's shares to N in accordance with the above statement, since F promised to transfer 15,00 shares to N, because it did not immediately acquire 15,00 shares of the defendant's shares to N in accordance with the letter of this case.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the relevant legal doctrine, as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. In regard to the grounds of appeal by an independent party intervenor G and H, the independent party intervenor G and H, and H, the lower court determined that Plaintiff D, who acquired 1,200 shares from Plaintiff A and the Plaintiff, was a shareholder on the premise that Plaintiff A had a claim against Defendant or N, but the lower court asserted that Plaintiff A’s claim against Defendant or N did not exist.

The ground of appeal is just an error in the fact-finding that belongs to the exclusive authority of the lower court, which is a fact-finding court, and it cannot be deemed legitimate

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.