1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, there is no resolution and resolution by the general meeting of shareholders and resolution by the board of directors as of April 9, 2014, and there is no resolution by the board of directors as of March 9, 2015.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except in the following cases. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Part 9 of the decision of the court of first instance shall be 10 to 17 as follows.

3) As seen earlier, G as a title truster of the instant shares, seeking confirmation of absence of the resolution by the general meeting of shareholders and the resolution by the board of directors as of April 9, 2014 and the resolution by the board of directors as of March 9, 2015. As such, the Plaintiff, who is merely a title truster, cannot be deemed as a shareholder of the Defendant Company. As such, the Plaintiff is not in a justifiable position to seek confirmation of absence of the resolution by the general meeting of shareholders and the resolution by the board of directors as of April 9, 2014, and as of March 9, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 79Da1989, Dec. 9, 1980; 84Meu319, Dec. 10, 1985). In addition, the Plaintiff’s position of director of the Defendant Company as of March 9, 2015, seeking confirmation of absence of the resolution by the general meeting of shareholders as of March 19, 20198.