The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

1. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the first instance judgment cited by the lower court as to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 through 4 (related to this case’s safety defense), the lower court determined that the officers of the Plaintiff’s clan were the members of the Si of G, and composed of four clans such as HP, Imph, M, and NP, and that the members of the clan including Imphs were the members of the Plaintiff clan, while holding a general meeting from May 2, 1999 to exclude HP and MP members, one of the members of the Plaintiff’s clans clans, from around May 23, 2001, the lower court did not hold a lawsuit at the 20th general meeting on November 204, that the officers of the Plaintiff’s clan were to be the representatives of the 10th general meeting, that the officers of the 2nd general meeting and the 2nd general meeting were to be held at the 10th general meeting, and that some of the members of the H and MP were to be held at the 10th general meeting.

The defendant's defense of safety is not a legitimate representative of the plaintiff's clan.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the judgment of the court below is just, and it is reasonable and reasonable as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.