1. The shareholder rights as to the shares listed in the separate sheet No. 1 among the Plaintiff A and Defendant C are against the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff B and Defendant.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Plaintiff A’s shares listed in the separate sheet No. 1, and Plaintiff B’s each title trust with Defendant D’s shares listed in the separate sheet No. 2, the Plaintiffs expressed their intent to terminate the title trust with respect to each of the above shares through the service of a duplicate of the complaint in this case, and the facts that the complaint in this case was served on Defendant C on April 30, 2019, and on April 29, 2019.

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiffs trusted each of the above shares to the defendants, and expressed their intent to terminate the title trust with the service of the complaint of this case. Thus, the shareholders' rights to the above shares were returned to the plaintiffs.

Therefore, shareholders' rights of each of the above shares are owned by the plaintiffs, and as long as the defendants are disputing shareholders' rights, the plaintiffs have interests to seek confirmation.

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. As to the unpaid assertion, the Defendants asserted that the Plaintiffs could not respond to the Plaintiffs’ claims, since they agreed to appoint Defendant C as an auditor of the Company E and to pay the remuneration to Defendant D as an internal director of the said Company, but did not pay the remuneration.

On the other hand, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiffs agreed to pay the remuneration, and the above assertion by the defendants is without merit.

B. The Defendants asserted that the Defendants violated the principle of good faith filed the instant lawsuit in order to prevent the Defendants from exercising their shareholders’ rights, and asserts that this is contrary to the principle of good faith.

On the other hand, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit of this case for the purpose of obstructing the exercise of the defendants' rights. Thus, the defendants' above assertion is without merit.

3. The plaintiffs' claim is justified and accepted.