1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The following facts of the case may be found as a whole together with Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 9, 13 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

① A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) is a company incorporated on May 23, 1994 for the purpose of soil construction business, etc., and the Plaintiff is the representative director of the Nonparty Company and the spouse of E (the death of December 1, 201) who was the largest shareholder (the shareholding ratio of 49.66%).

② As of December 31, 2014, the Defendant stated that, as of December 31, 2014, the Nonparty was holding 12,00 shares out of the total number of shares issued by Nonparty Company 80,00 shares (hereinafter “instant shares”) by Nonparty Company as the promoters of Nonparty Company 11,00 shares issued.

Plaintiff

The gist of the argument: The plaintiff is the actual shareholder who paid the purchase price of the total amount of 80,000 shares issued by the non-party company. Among them, the shares of this case were held in title in the same manner as the attached Table 2 to the defendant (Provided, That in the preparatory brief dated September 14, 2015, the plaintiff asserted that E was in trust with the plaintiff, and in the preparatory brief dated November 17, 2015, the plaintiff trusted the name via E). Since the plaintiff expressed his/her intention to terminate the title trust by delivery of a duplicate of the complaint to the defendant, the shareholders' right was returned to the plaintiff.

Since there is a dispute over shareholders' rights with the defendant, there is a benefit of confirmation.

2. A person registered as a shareholder on the register of shareholders is presumed to be a shareholder of the company and, in order to reverse this, there is a burden of proof on the part of denying shareholder rights. Thus, in order to establish a trust with the name of a shareholder on the register of shareholders and a separate shareholder as a nominal borrower, the person must prove that there is a separate shareholder on the register of shareholders.

Supreme Court Decision 2014Da21851 Decided December 11, 2014