[2] The validity of the resolution of the general meeting of clans which lack a notification for convening some clans (Invalidity) and whether the representative of the non-incorporated association who is not qualified as a legitimate representative can confirm the procedural acts conducted at the fact-finding court in the final appeal (affirmative)

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

A clan is a naturally created family organization formed by descendants of a common ancestor for the purpose of protecting the graves of the common ancestor, promoting friendship between descendants and descendants, and is established by their descendants at the same time as the death of the same clan. If a clan has and continues to be organized to be represented by the representative elected in accordance with the rules or customs of the clan, the organization as a non-corporate group is recognized, and the issue of whether a clan has the capacity to be a party as a non-corporate group is related to the requirements for litigation, and it shall be determined at the time of the closing of argument in the fact-finding court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 91Da3161, Nov. 26, 1991; 97Da18547, Dec. 9, 197).

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, according to the adopted evidence, the court below recognized the fact that the plaintiff clan was composed of the non-party 1, who is the representative of the defendant clan and the non-party 2, who is the non-party 1's non-party 1, and the members of the plaintiff clan gather together on the non-party 1's designated date, and judged that the plaintiff clan was a family organization formed naturally at the same time as the non-party 1's death. In light of the circumstances that the non-party 2, who had worked for the representative of the plaintiff clan, were selected again as the representative of the plaintiff clan as the representative of the plaintiff clan, the judgment of the court below is just, and the argument in the grounds of appeal that the plaintiff's family cannot be recognized as a party to the plaintiff's clan is not acceptable.

2. Regarding ground of appeal No. 2

Since a clan is a naturally created clan group composed of members for the purpose of protecting the graves of a common ancestor, promoting religious services, and promoting friendship among its members, it is reasonable to view that descendants who share the same clan with a common ancestor naturally become its members when they reach majority without distinction of gender, and that there is no resolution of a clan general meeting held without a convocation notice to some members of a clan (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Da34982, Sept. 6, 2007). However, the litigation conducted by a non-incorporated group, which is not a legitimate representative, becomes effective retroactively at the time of the act if the representative who lawfully acquired the qualification as the representative confirms the litigation, and such ratification may be made at the time of the final appeal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 96Da2527, Mar. 14, 1997; 200Da5397, Jul. 27, 2001).

According to the records, for the first time in the trial of a political party, all 14 members excluding one member of the clan residing in the United States according to the notification of Nonparty 2, who is a member of the clan of the plaintiff clan, among the members of the plaintiff clan, shall hold a clan general meeting while the non-party 2 attends the family of the non-party 2, and the non-party 2 shall pass a resolution to select the non-party 2 as the representative of the plaintiff clan, and the non-party 2 shall ratification the litigation conducted by himself as the representative of the plaintiff clan, and the litigation conducted by the court of first instance and the court of original instance, as the representative of the plaintiff clan, have a retroactive effect at the time of all the acts.

3. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 3 and 4

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged facts based on adopted evidence and comprehensively considered such facts, and judged that the defendant's clan asserted cannot be deemed to be "Sadong clan clan that was a registered titleholder of the real estate of this case" and it is reasonable to view the plaintiff's clan as the owner of the real estate of this case. In this case, in light of the facts established by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and in light of the reasoning of the judgment below and the records, the fact-finding of the court below cannot be deemed to have exceeded the limit of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, the part of the court below's grounds for appeal disputing evidence preparation and fact-finding

Meanwhile, as long as the real estate of this case is owned by the plaintiff clan and its registration is consistent with the substantive legal relationship, it is clear that the defendant's assertion based on the premise that it was null and void at the time of the registration of the plaintiff clan is rejected. Although the court below did not make an explicit decision, it does not affect the conclusion of the judgment. Therefore, the grounds of appeal claiming illegality in omission of judgment cannot

4. Conclusion

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

Justices Ahn Dai-hee (Presiding Justice)