1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff Company is a corporation with the purpose of home shopping business, etc., and the Nonparty C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) was established around April 1978 and engaged in manufacturing and selling of gas appliances and electrical and electronic appliances.

B. Around January 28, 2015, the Defendant entered at around 1993 and administered the purchase and production business until C is settled in default, and Nonparty D entered at around 2007 and took charge of the financial accounting affairs until C is settled in default.

C. E was established as KRW 30,000 on February 11, 2015 for the purpose of running the manufacturing and selling business of the gas apparatus and electrical and electronic apparatus following the insolvency of C. At the time of its establishment, the Defendant acquired 300 shares among the shares issued 6,000 shares, Nonparty F, the Defendant’s living together, 2,700 shares, and Nonparty D acquired 3,00 shares in the entirety of F.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 11, Eul evidence 1 and 5, the purport of whole pleadings]

2. The gist of the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim is a beneficial shareholder who bears the cost of establishment and the share price of KRW 47,00,000 at the time of establishment of E. The shares listed in the attached list under the name of the Defendant (hereinafter “instant shares”) merely nominal trust with the Defendant, and thus, the said title trust agreement is terminated upon the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case.

Therefore, the instant shares in the name of the Defendant were restored to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant contests this issue, thus seeking confirmation of the existence of the Plaintiff’s right to the said shares.

3. Determination

A. On the other hand, the person registered as a shareholder in the register of shareholders is presumed to be the shareholder of the company, and in order to reverse this, there is a burden of proof on the part of denying the shareholder's rights, so that the name of the shareholder in the register of shareholders was trusted and that there is a separate shareholder in substance as the name borrowed.