logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.09.05 2014나3878
소유권이전등기
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit is indicated as the representative of the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff clans defense against the defendant is demanding the defendant to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the cancellation of title trust with respect to the shares of this case in the defendant's name. Accordingly, the defendant raised the lawsuit of this case without the resolution of a legitimate clan general meeting, and therefore, it is unlawful.

B. (1) The provisions of Article 265 of the Civil Act concerning the preservation of collective property cannot be applied to the preservation of collective property. Barring special circumstances, barring special circumstances, a resolution of a general meeting of members pursuant to Article 276 (1) of the Civil Act shall be passed. Thus, even where a clan which is not a juristic person files a lawsuit for the preservation of collective property, it shall undergo a resolution of the general meeting of

In this case, in holding a clan general meeting, each person shall be given an opportunity to participate in the meeting, discussion, and resolution by individually giving each person an opportunity to participate in the meeting, discussion, and resolution to all members of the clan who can individually notify all members of the family who reside in Korea after determining the scope of the members of the clan subject to notification for convening the meeting, except in extenuating circumstances. Therefore, a resolution at the general meeting

(2) The Plaintiff’s clan sought the implementation of the procedure for the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of the termination of title trust with respect to the instant shares constitutes the act of preserving collective property that requires a resolution of the general meeting of clans.

For this reason, the issue of whether the lawsuit in this case was brought up through legitimate resolution of the general meeting of the clan, and ① the plaintiff clan holds a clan meeting on February 10, 2013 for the members of the clan confirmed after the scope of the members of the clan called up by the clan, etc., with the certification of the contents of the plaintiff clan on January 29, 2013.

arrow