1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

See the attached list of the defendant's claims.

1. The reasoning of the court of the first instance’s explanation concerning the instant case is as follows, and thus, it is consistent with the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for the part being partially dismissed or added as follows. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. Parts 8.15 to 20 of the first instance judgment shall be written or added in the following parts:

“In order to reverse the presumption of entry into the shareholder registry as a shareholder, this is presumed to be a shareholder of the company and there is a burden of proof on the part of denying the shareholder’s right (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 84Da2082, Mar. 26, 1985). In addition, even if a third party, other than a shareholder on the shareholder registry, actually engaged in the payment of new shares acquisition price, the underlying cause of such act can be established as a trade relationship, such as a title trust relationship, or a simple loan relationship, with one party’s duty to invest in the capital, and thus, a third party’s act of paying new shares cannot be readily concluded as a real shareholder based on a title trust relationship under the shareholder registry under the third party’s name (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da27755, Sept. 6, 2007). This legal doctrine is related to the shareholder of a stock company, as seen below, Article 10 subparag. 19, supra. 201.

(B) According to the statements in the evidence Nos. 18 to 23, K and L are only in the name of the plaintiff in the related criminal cases (Seoul Central District Court 2016Kadan5668).