1. It is confirmed that the Plaintiff is a shareholder of the shares listed in the separate sheet.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The company’s capital increase and stock title trust 1) C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Company”) are limited to the company.

Around April 26, 2002, the Plaintiff was established with KRW 100 million (10,000 per share, total number of outstanding shares 10,000) capital, and the Plaintiff invested the total amount of capital. 2) At the time of incorporation, the Plaintiff requested the title trust of 3,000 shares among the shares of the company to the Defendant and D, respectively, and the Defendant et al. was registered as shareholders in the register of shareholders.

3) On December 24, 2003, the company issued 20,000 new shares as a result of capital increase of KRW 200 million. The Plaintiff invested in the total amount of the capital increase. The new shares were distributed according to the shares ratio of existing shareholders, thereby under title trust with each of 6,00 shares to the Defendant and D, and the Defendant, etc. was listed as the shareholders of each of the above new shares in the register of shareholders. 4) At the same time, the Defendant, on the company’s list of shareholders, was listed as holding 9,00 shares listed in the separate list of shareholders (hereinafter “instant shares”).

B. On September 15, 2014, the Defendant: (a) drafted a certificate of title trust stating that “the Defendant received a proposal from the Plaintiff for a title trust on shares 9,000 shares of the company and registered as a shareholder; (b) the Defendant did not have made any contribution; and (c) the actual owner of shares of the Defendant’s name is the Plaintiff.” (b) The Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the termination of the title trust with respect to the shares of this case by the delivery of the instant complaint.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff expressed his intent to terminate the title trust of the instant shares to the Defendant, thereby returning the shareholder’s right to the instant shares to the Plaintiff, a title truster.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da109708, Feb. 14, 2013). As to this, the Defendant is the Defendant.