Standard of determining the substance of the clan or the branch clan and the name of the clan;

It is common practice or custom that the name of the clans or the clans of the first clans or the clans shall be attached to the services of the Jung-si or to the services of the clans or to the services of the clans or to the services of the clans, but in light of the fact that the clans or the clans naturally created for the religious services of the common clans, the management of graves, and the mutual friendship among their descendants, any clans shall be judged by their substantive contents, regardless of their titles, such as the scope of the descendants who are the co-governments or the descendants who are the members of the clans and the status of the funeral management.

Article 48 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 80Da640 Decided September 24, 1980 (Gong1984, 307) 80Da1302 Decided December 27, 1983 (Gong1984, 307) decided December 26, 1989 (Gong190, 449) 91Da42616 Decided May 26, 192 (Dong)

Plaintiff (Appointed Party) Attorney Jeon Soo-soo, Counsel for the plaintiff-appointed party-appellant

Attorney Park Jae-il, Counsel for the defendant-appellant from among the type of Cho Chang-soo and Cho Jong-chul

Busan District Court Decision 90Na12783 delivered on October 11, 1991

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the plaintiff (appointed party and the defendant for retrial).

1. We examine the ground of appeal No. 1 by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party, Defendant for reexamination, Plaintiff 2).

It is common practice or custom that the name of the clans or the clans of the first clans or the clans shall be attached to the services of the clans or to the services of the clans or to the services of the clans or to the services of the clans, but in light of the fact that the clans or the clans naturally created for the religious services of the common clans, the management of graves, and the mutual friendship among their descendants, any clans shall be judged by their substantive contents, such as the scope of the descendants and the status of the graves management (see Supreme Court Decisions 80Da640 delivered on September 24, 1980; 89Meu1484 delivered on December 26, 1989).

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged the fact that although the name of the defendant (the plaintiff, the re-appellant, and the defendant 2) entered the name of "Yaam Amam Amam Am.", the essence of the plaintiff's clan is the joint line of the non-party 1's six assistant members, and the non-party 2 was composed of his descendants, installing the tomb of the above joint ancestor and conducting the trial and the management of graves within the forest of this case. In light of the evidence relations which the court below prepared according to the records, we agree with the above judgment of the court below, and there is no error of law of misunderstanding the legal principles as argued by the theory of lawsuit,

2. We examine the second ground for appeal.

The theory of the plaintiff's clan was erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the representative of the clan or incomplete hearing on the premise that the plaintiff's clan is a clan that is a joint ancestor, unlike the facts decided by the court below, but as long as the court below lawful and confirmed that the plaintiff's clan was not a clan that is a joint ancestor for the non-party 1, the theory of the lawsuit does not need to be judged further.

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 Song Man-man (Presiding Justice)