A. Whether a resolution of the appointment of representative at the general meeting of a clan that is not convened by legitimate convening authority without complying with the clan rules (negative)

(b) Where there is no rules or practice of a clan, the method of convening a convening general meeting of the clan and whether the resolution of the general meeting of the clan held without notifying some of the clan members (negative)

A. For a resolution of the general meeting for the appointment of a clan to be valid, a resolution of the general meeting for the appointment of the clan requires that the general meeting shall be convened by a legitimate convening authority, so if the general meeting is not convened by a legitimate convening authority and does not comply with the rules of the clan, a resolution of the appointment of the representative

B. In the absence of the rules or practice of a clan, a call-up by the general meeting of a clan must be given by the convening authority in an appropriate manner to the adult male who is the cause of the clan, where the whereabouts of the clans eligible for attending the meeting are clearly residing in the Republic of Korea and the notification of communication is possible, and the resolution of a clan meeting held without the above notification of communication should be denied to some of the clans, and it shall not be deemed that the resolution has been given by the majority of the clans that

Article 71 of the Civil Act, Article 48 of the Civil Procedure Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 90Da28542 delivered on Nov. 13, 1990 (Gong1991, 1040), Supreme Court Decision 90Da30309 delivered on Feb. 28, 1992 (Gong1992, 1160), Supreme Court Decision 91Da43862 delivered on Mar. 10, 1992 (Gong192, 1294), Supreme Court Decision 92Da30375 delivered on Oct. 27, 1992 (Gong192, 3289)

Gwangju District Court Decision 201Na1448 delivered on August 1, 201

Defendant 1 and five Defendants, Attorneys Han Han-chul et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 91Na30561 delivered on June 24, 1992

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate brief).

1. For a resolution of the general meeting for the appointment of a clan to be valid, it is necessary to say that the general meeting has been convened by legitimate convening authorities, so if the general meeting is not convened by legitimate convening authorities, it shall be deemed that the resolution for the appointment of the representative at the above general meeting is null and void.

The reasoning of the judgment below is examined in accordance with the records. In this regard, it is proper that the court below held that the above general meeting of the plaintiff clan on November 23, 1991 was convened unilaterally by 26 members, such as the above non-party 2, etc. without any requirement for convening a general meeting in order to resign from the non-party 1, who is the representative of the clan at the time, and to elect non-party 2 as a new clan representative, and that the non-party 2, such as the above non-party 2, etc. was convened unilaterally without the requirement for convening a general meeting in accordance with the rules, and therefore, the above general meeting was illegal because it constitutes the case where a person who has no right to convene a general meeting was convened, and therefore it is unlawful that the

The issue is that the above non-party 1, the representative of the plaintiff clan, is raising the co-ownership of the land in the dispute of this case, which is the property of the clan, on the ground that it was difficult for him to expect that the new representative of the plaintiff clan would respond properly to the request for convening the above special meeting for the purpose of restoring the above non-party 2 to the plaintiff clan for the purpose of restoring the title of ownership on the register of the land in this case for the future of the plaintiff clan, and on the ground that it was difficult for him to expect that he would respond properly to the request for convening the above general meeting for the purpose of restoring the above non-party 2, it is argued that the procedure for convening the general meeting cannot be a defect in the resolution. However, this is not only a new argument that was not asserted at all by the

2. In a case where there is no rules or practice of a clan, a call-up by the general meeting of a clan requires that the convening authority shall reside in the Republic of Korea among the clan members eligible to attend the general meeting and give notice in an appropriate manner to the adult male who is a member of the clan that can give notice of contact with him/her clearly (see Supreme Court Decision 91Da30309 delivered on February 28, 1992). The resolution of a clan meeting held without the above notice of convening a clan shall be invalid, and the resolution of the clan meeting shall not be different even if the resolution of the clan is obtained with the consent of the majority of the members of the clan that can give notice of the resolution (see Supreme Court Decision 91Da43862 delivered on March 10, 1992).

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, in holding the general meeting of the plaintiff clan dated November 23, 191, the court below held that the resolution of the appointment of the representative of the clan made at the general meeting is null and void since it did not go through legitimate convocation due to the lack of convocation notice for some of the members in this regard, since the court below judged that the above fact-finding and the judgment of the court below are just and acceptable, and there are no errors in the misapprehension of law, since the above fact-finding and the judgment of the court below are all justified, and there are no errors in the misapprehension of law, and there are no errors in the misapprehension of law.

This paper argues that the court below's argument that the plaintiff's 50 members of the plaintiff's clan Gap's clan No. 14 (the member's name list) lack the qualification for membership, especially the head of the unit, or the deceased's already included, has failed to properly examine whether or not the plaintiff's 50 members of the plaintiff's clan. However, in this case where the plaintiff did not actively assert or prove this point, the court below did not err by failing to examine ex officio, and the plaintiff's argument that the method of notifying the convening of the general assembly of the clan's members consisting of many people residing across the country does not require individual notification, unless there is a special provision, cannot be accepted. All arguments are without merit.

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

Justices Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice) Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice)