1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is the legal spouse of F, who died on June 24, 2015 (hereinafter “the deceased”) as the owner of an incorporated agricultural company E (hereinafter “instant company”).

The total number of shares issued by the instant company is 5,000 shares, and the register of shareholders is divided into 1,000 shares among the above shares, 1,250 shares among the deceased and G, and 1,250 shares among the children born between the deceased and the deceased, 1,250 shares, 1,00 shares of the Plaintiff, and H born between the deceased and the Plaintiff as 500 shares. However, the above shares are all owned by the deceased, and the persons registered as shareholders in the register of shareholders other than the deceased (hereinafter “registered shareholders”) are the title trustee.

Defendant B renounced inheritance after the deceased’s death, and Defendant D did not conclude a share transfer contract with the deceased, and all of the above two persons were not shareholders of the instant company, and Defendant C inherited 1,111 shares corresponding to the shares of the instant company owned by the deceased, among 5,000 shares of the instant company owned by the deceased.

As the number of shareholders, shares, and actual shares entered in the register of shareholders of the instant company are in conflict with those entered in the register of shareholders of the instant company, there is a cause of confusion between them and their legal relations, seeking confirmation as to whether shares belong to the same content.

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. In a lawsuit for confirmation of relevant legal principles, the benefit of confirmation must be the requirement for protection of rights, and the benefit of confirmation should be recognized when a judgment of confirmation is the most effective means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s right or legal status’s imminent unstable danger. Thus, in a lawsuit for confirmation, a person who causes or is likely to cause unstable danger in the Plaintiff’s right or legal status has the qualification as the Defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da68650, Feb. 9, 2007). Moreover, a lawsuit for confirmation does not necessarily have a legal relationship between the original defendant and the original defendant.