1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim for confirmation of shareholder status against Defendant C Co., Ltd. is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant Company’s total number of shares issued by the Company established on September 7, 2017 for the purpose of building construction business, etc. is 20,500 shares, and the face value per share is 10,000 won (hereinafter “instant shares”) and the register of shareholders of the Defendant Company is registered as shareholders by Defendant B.

B. Defendant B, who was the representative director of the Defendant Company, operated the Defendant Company as E and Dong business, retired from office on January 31, 2019, and the Plaintiff was appointed as the representative director of the Defendant Company on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination ex officio as to the claim for confirmation of shareholder status against Defendant C

A. Since a lawsuit for confirmation is recognized in cases where obtaining a judgment of confirmation is the most effective means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s legal status’s anxiety and risk, filing a lawsuit for performance, despite the fact that filing a lawsuit for confirmation does not have a final solution of a dispute, and thus there is no benefit of confirmation.

B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da60239, Mar. 9, 2006).

In light of the above, the Plaintiff’s assertion and proof that the shares of this case are owned by the Plaintiff, and thus, the Plaintiff may request the Defendant Company to change the position of the Plaintiff. As such, obtaining a confirmation judgment against the Defendant Company cannot be deemed the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate the anxiety and risk existing in the rights or legal status asserted by the Plaintiff

Moreover, insofar as the Plaintiff claims against the Defendant Company for the implementation of the transfer procedure regarding the instant shares, there is no benefit to seek confirmation of the shareholder status against the Defendant Company separately.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant Company is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation.

3. Claim for confirmation of shareholder status against Defendant B, and claim for the transfer of shareholder status against Defendant Company.