A. Whether the common ancestor of a clan constitutes a specific clan

(b) The case holding that it is not permissible to allow a separate assertion of the common ancestor of a clan because it constitutes a voluntary change of a party;

A. A clan is a naturally created clan organization with the purpose of protecting the graves of a common ancestor and promoting friendship among its members, not requiring a special organization, and it is possible to have a little number of clans in a clan depending on who is a common ancestor, therefore, in identifying a specific clan and its substance, it shall be the most important criteria for whom a common ancestor of a clan is to be a member of the common ancestor.

B. The case holding that if the plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff's clan was a clan for which Gap is a joint ancestor in the first instance trial and the plaintiff's clan was a clan for which Eul is a joint ancestor Eul, it is not permitted as it is because the plaintiff's clan was changed at will to a party with a separate entity.

(b)Article 31 of the Civil Procedure Act. Articles 48 and 227 of the Civil Procedure Act;

(b) Supreme Court Decision 72Da1090 delivered on September 12, 1972 (No. 203Du5 delivered on April 24, 1992) 91Da18965 delivered on April 24, 1992 (Gong192, 1671 delivered on March 10, 1970

[Defendant-Appellee] Kim Jong-sung, Attorneys Park Jong-dae et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee-appellee-appellant-appellee-appellee-appellant

Defendant 1 and 16 Defendants’ legal representative

Seoul High Court Decision 92Na8127 delivered on March 17, 1994

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

A clan is a natural clan organization that aims at the protection of the graves of a common ancestor, the religious services, and the friendship among the members of a clan, and it does not require a special organization, and it is possible to have a little number of religious services in a clan depending on who is the common ancestor. Therefore, in identifying a clan and understanding its substance, it shall be the most important criteria for who is the common ancestor of the clan.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below argued in the first instance court's argument that "the plaintiff's clan was set up in the city of Kim Jong-si and succeeded to 29 members of the 29th century, and that "the plaintiff's clan was naturally formed among the clans residing in the mutual reputation centering around the upper village," and argued that "the plaintiff's clan was a clan of the 8 years old members of the 191 village," and that "the 8 years old members of the 1991 village clan," and that the plaintiff's clan was a common clan in the first instance court's argument that "the plaintiff's clan was a common vessel of the 29th village village clan," and that the plaintiff's assertion that "the second descendant of the 29th village village clan was a common vessel of the 1st court, and therefore, it cannot be permitted as it arbitrarily changes the plaintiff's own substance as a separate party.

The above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there are no errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the unity of arguments, or in the misapprehension of legal principles as to clans or party ability.

In addition, the court below's decision that did not recognize the existence of a clan, which has its unique meaning as a joint organization, is justified in light of the records. All arguments are without merit.

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 on the bench.

Justices Lee Jae-soo (Presiding Justice)