beta
(영문) 대법원 2015.12.10 2014다29483

소유권이전등기등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Changwon District Court Panel Division.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the validity of the resolution of a general meeting made by the year 2013, the lower court determined that the resolution made at the general meeting is null and void, on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s customary holding of a general meeting on October 20 of each year was difficult, and that the resolution passed by the J as its representative or the resolution of ratification was defective in both the general meeting on January 14, 2012, the general meeting on December 3, 2012, the general meeting on December 22, 2013, and the general meeting on November 22, 2013.

The judgment below

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is acceptable. In so doing, it did not err by misapprehending the legal principles regarding the validity of convening and adopting a resolution by a clan general meeting, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence

2. As to the ratification of procedural acts conducted in the final appeal

A. The procedural acts conducted by the representative of an unincorporated association shall have retroactive effect upon the ratification of the procedural acts by the representative who lawfully acquired the qualification as the representative after the procedural acts conducted by the representative, and such ratification may also be conducted in the final appeal.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 96Da2527, Mar. 14, 1997; 201Da70169, Apr. 13, 2012). Meanwhile, a person who is qualified as a representative of a clan did not directly call a clan general meeting.

Even if he consented to the convening of the general meeting of the clan and had the members of the clan convene it, it cannot be said to be a call of a person who is not authorized to convene the general meeting of the clan.

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da42908 delivered on May 14, 2002, etc.). Furthermore, a clan assembly has determined the scope of the members of the clan subject to a notification for convening a clan by setting forth the scope of the members of the clan, unless there are special circumstances, such as errors in the entry of the members of the clan in connection with the clans, and shall identify the location of the members of the clan by making every effort possible