1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Around July 1994, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion invested KRW 30 million in Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”), and invested KRW 50 million in Defendant C and net D couple, and Nonparty E invested KRW 20 million in KRW.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s share is 30%, and the Plaintiff’s share is registered as 1,00 shares only 10%, and the Plaintiff’s share falls short of 20% is registered in the name of Nonparty F, the father of Defendant C, and is currently registered in the name of Defendant C.

The network D's confirmation document No. 2, and Defendant C and the network D's confirmation document are prepared to the Plaintiff, and it acknowledged that the Plaintiff's shares were 3,000 shares.

Therefore, the Defendant Company is obligated to implement transfer procedures with respect to 3,00 shares, among shares registered in the name of Defendant C in the register of shareholders, to which the Plaintiff is a shareholder.

(2) According to the evidence No. 6 of the judgment of the court below, the plaintiff asserted that the total number of the plaintiff's shares is 3,000 shares, and although it had already been owned 1,00 shares, the plaintiff sought additional 3,00 shares for the confirmation of ownership and implementation of the transfer procedure for transfer of ownership. 2. The defendant C among the 10,00 shares of the defendant company's total shares (10,000 shares per share) on September 12, 2013, among the 10,00 shares of the defendant company's shareholder registry (10,000 shares per share), it can be recognized that the non-party C had been registered as holding 1,00 shares of the defendant company's total shares.

A person registered as a shareholder in the register of shareholders is presumed to be a shareholder of the company and has the burden of proof in order to reverse the presumption.

(see Supreme Court Decisions 84Meu2082, Mar. 26, 1985; 2007Da51505, Mar. 11, 2010). Therefore, in order to assert that the name of a shareholder in the register of shareholders was trusted and that there was a separate shareholder as the name borrowed from that name, the party asserting such title trust relationship should prove the fact of borrowing the name in the name of the nominal owner.

Supreme Court Decision 201.3.24.