1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Basic Facts

Defendant Company is a company established by G on March 4, 1971.

G A died on September 29, 1993, and around the above time, G and its son F (E. 21 March 21, 1991, resignation on March 1, 1994) operated the Defendant Company as the representative director.

After F’s resignation, G’s fraud, as the representative director on March 1, 1994, operated the Defendant Company, and died on July 31, 2001, and since H’s son, as the representative director on August 16, 2001, operated the Defendant Company.

The total number of shares issued by the Defendant Company is 13,400 shares, and now the register of shareholders of the Defendant Company is listed as shareholders with I 8,900 shares and H J 4,500 shares, respectively.

The plaintiff (appointed party, hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) A is the plaintiff, the plaintiff B, C, the selected party E, and the F are children of G.

[Based on recognition, the plaintiffs asserted that Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3 and Eul evidence Nos. 18, 25, and 26 (including serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings, and the gist of the plaintiffs' assertion that the plaintiffs asserted that Eul, the founder, donated 1,340 shares out of the total issued shares of the defendant company 13,40 shares to Gap, 2,680 shares to the designated parties F, and that Eul succeeded to 315 shares of the plaintiff, Eul, 2,680 shares after death on September 29, 193, while G owned 2,680 shares, they claim that the plaintiffs and the designated parties are shareholders of the defendant company who hold shares of the contents stated in the claim for shareholders' rights, and they seek confirmation of the status of shareholders against the defendant company to exercise shareholders' rights.

Since the existence of the benefit of confirmation in the lawsuit for confirmation 1 of the legality of the lawsuit in this case is a matter of ex officio investigation, the court shall decide ex officio regardless of the party's assertion.

A lawsuit for confirmation is recognized in cases where it is the most effective and appropriate means to determine it as a confirmation judgment when the legal status of the plaintiff is unstable.