1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) is a corporation established for the establishment of infrastructure and software business, etc., Defendant E is a representative director of the Defendant Co., Ltd., and Defendant F is a director of the Defendant Co., Ltd., respectively.

B. The Defendant Company’s shareholder registry as of April 25, 2018 stated that Plaintiff B owned 6,600 shares, Defendant E’s 1,000 shares, Defendant F’s 8,00 shares, G’s 2,40 shares, and H owned 2,00 shares, among the total shares issued by Defendant Company 20,00 shares.

C. On May 11, 2018, Defendant Company held a temporary general meeting of shareholders and resolved on the modification of its articles of incorporation, the relocation of its head office, and the increase of its capital for consideration.

Around June 1, 2018, the Defendant Company issued 622,00 shares of new shares on or around June 1, 2018, and thereafter, the Defendant Company’s register of shareholders as of July 18, 2018 stated that the Plaintiff Company owned 6,60 shares (1.028%) among the total shares issued by the Defendant Company as of July 18, 2018, Defendant E owns 272,168 shares, Defendant FF’s 196,352 shares, G 9,88 shares, and H owned 6,992 shares.

E. Around August 16, 2018, the Plaintiffs continued to commit unlawful acts, such as interference with business, breach of trust, and embezzlement, etc. with Defendant E and F, and thus, submitted a written request for convening a temporary general meeting of shareholders (hereinafter “written request for convening a temporary general meeting of shareholders of this case”) to demand the Defendant E and F to proceed with the procedures for convening a temporary general meeting of shareholders for the dismissal of Defendant E and F, but the Defendant Company rejected the said request for convening a general meeting on August 22, 2018, on the ground that the Plaintiff Company is not a shareholder of the Defendant Company, but a shareholder of the Plaintiff Company A, who holds shares equivalent to at least 3/100 of the total number of shares issued by the Defendant Company.

F. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit on September 2, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 11, 15, 16, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 3, 6, and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Dismissal of the representative director from among the lawsuits in this case.