Whether the head of the clan has the right to dispose of the property of the clan;

Unless the head of a clan has been authorized to dispose of the property of a clan, he/she shall not be deemed to have the right to property of a clan.

Article 276 of the Civil Act

Attorney Kim Yong-sik, Counsel for the defendant-appellant in charge of the clan of Korea

Defendant 1 and one other

Jeonju District Court Decision 77Na211 delivered on February 24, 1978

The part of the original judgment against the plaintiff shall be reversed, and this part of the case shall be remanded to the Jeonju District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal by the plaintiff's attorney are examined.

According to the judgment of the court below, the court below recognized the following facts. In other words, the plaintiff's non-party 1 entered into a contract for the sale of state-owned property in the name of the trustee non-party 1 for the purpose of getting the non-party 2,36 from the country to the country, but the non-party 1 was unable to pay the purchase price within the prescribed period which was left in consumption of the non-party 1, but the non-party 1, who was punished by the above non-party 1, did not pay the above non-party 2 with the deceased non-party 2, but the non-party 1 paid the non-party 1 with the deceased non-party 2, and the non-party 3 and the non-party 1, and paid the non-party 1 and the non-party 1, and paid the non-party 1, the non-party 1 and the non-party 1's non-party 1 paid the purchase price in the name of the Dong.

However, the judgment below is erroneous as follows.

In other words, the court below determined that Defendant 1, etc. agreed to the effect that the non-party 3 and the non-party 1's non-party 1's clan members, etc. belong to the above defendant, etc., and that the non-party 1,409's clan shall be deemed to belong to the above defendant, etc., and therefore it cannot be deemed that the plaintiff's head has the right to dispose of the property rights of the clan as a matter of course on the part of the plaintiff's clan, and without any explanation that the above plaintiff's head, etc. has the right to dispose of the property rights of the clan, and without any explanation that the non-party 1 and the non-party 1's head, etc. have the right to dispose of the property rights of the clan, the court below determined that the agreement with the above plaintiff's head, the non-party 1, or the non-party 1's head, and the non-party 1's head, and the non-party 1's head, etc. shall not be found.

Therefore, the argument on this point is with merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges to reverse and remand the part of the plaintiff's failure in the original judgment.

Justices Yang Byung-ho (Presiding Judge) (Presiding Justice)