1. Defendant C Co., Ltd. shall transfer to the Plaintiff the title of shares listed in the separate sheet.

1. The fact that Defendant C Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”) was established on August 12, 2015 with 20,000 shares issued on August 12, 2015, and KRW 200,000 of the shares of Defendant Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co.”), and the fact that 10,000 shares of the shares of Defendant Co., Ltd were registered under D’s name, and that the remaining 10,00 shares were registered

2. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was invested in 1/2 each of D and capital and incorporated the Defendant Company. At the time, 10,000 shares owned by the Plaintiff out of 20,000 shares of the Defendant Company were registered in the name of the Defendant B, who had relationship with the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff terminated the title trust contract by serving a duplicate of the instant complaint. Defendant B transferred 10,000 shares to the Plaintiff, and Defendant Company is obligated to implement the transfer procedure in the name of the Plaintiff with respect to the said shares.

3. Determination as to the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B

A. A person registered as a shareholder in the register of shareholders is presumed to be a shareholder of the company in question and, in order to reverse this, there is a burden of proof on the part of denying the shareholder's rights. Thus, in order to assert that the name of the shareholder in the register of shareholders was trusted and that of the borrowed name, a person who is the nominal name has a separate shareholder, the party asserting such title trust relationship must prove the borrowed name.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Da27755 Decided September 6, 2007, etc.). B.

Judgment

In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in evidence Nos. 1 and 3, evidence Nos. 1 and 3, witness E, F, and G testimony, the Plaintiff and D make a joint agreement with the content that they will jointly manage the Defendant Company by investing each 1/2 of August 3, 2015, respectively. ② The Plaintiff was actually involved in the operation of the Defendant Company; ③ the Plaintiff’s loss of the status of the joint business operator on June 10, 2016, and ④ the Plaintiff made and delivered a written waiver of the joint agreement to D on the grounds that the Plaintiff and Defendant B lost the status of the joint business operator in violation of the joint agreement.