2. The Plaintiff, among the 46,724 square meters of H forest land in Changwon-si, Changwon-si, and Defendant D shall be 6/32.

A. The defendant's main defense of safety (1) The plaintiff cannot be viewed as a clan of its own meaning, and thus, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as it was filed by a person who has no capacity to be

② Even if the Plaintiff has a unique meaning of a clan, the resolution of the general meeting of the Plaintiff’s argument that the Plaintiff had decided to elect G as the representative of the Plaintiff shall be null and void.

Ultimately, the instant lawsuit filed with G as the representative of the Plaintiff is unlawful.

B. Determination 1) Whether a clan has no substance of the Plaintiff clan or whether a clan has an organic organization to the extent that it can conduct title trust with the acquisition of the right to real estate at a specific time, etc., is a matter concerning the subject to whom the right belongs, that is, a matter concerning the principal proposal, which is a separate issue from the ability of the parties to the clan (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da64607, Jan. 10, 2013). The Defendant’s argument as to whether the Plaintiff clan has lost from the time when the forest recorded in the disposition of the clan was circumstances against the deceasedO, is within its original decision. A) Since the relevant clan legal principles do not require a special organization act for its establishment, it does not necessarily require a special organization act for the establishment of the clan, but it does not necessarily require that the representative of the clan has to be appointed or has not been obliged to perform external activities, such as the name of the clan, etc. when it prescribes the regulations for the protection of graves, religious s, and the clan.

(See Supreme Court Decision 95Da16103 delivered on November 14, 1995, Supreme Court Decision 94Da5699 delivered on March 12, 1996, Supreme Court Decision 96Da25715 delivered on November 14, 1997, etc.).