All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal by the plaintiff are assessed against the plaintiff and the independent party intervenor.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court is justifiable to have rejected the Plaintiff’s claim on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the subsequent purchaser, who is the other party to the exercise of the right to set aside a right to set aside a claim, invalidation of seizure due to unspecified reasons of the seizure order

2. On the grounds of appeal by an independent party intervenor, the lower court determined that the Intervenor’s claim of this case based on the premise that the Intervenor cannot be deemed to have acquired the right to collateral security for the instant share certificates, on the grounds as stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the transfer security right, omitting judgment on the assertion of commercial lien, invalidation of seizure, bona fide acquisition, etc., as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal by the plaintiff are assessed against the plaintiff, and the costs of appeal by the plaintiff are assessed against the independent party intervenor. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.