The meaning of the date when the family council may ratification;

The date when the family council can be ratified is not the day when the member of the family council becomes aware of the fact of sale and purchase, but the day when the member could convene the family council without delay if he had taken the procedure of convening the family council, and it is not the day when the family council was called actually.

Article 146 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff

Attorney Lee Jae-sung et al., Counsel for the defendant special representative

Jeonju District Court Decision 78Na133 delivered on February 1, 1979

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The defendant's attorney's grounds of appeal are examined comprehensively.

According to the judgment of the court below, on December 28, 1974, 12.30 days after the defendant's legal representative 2 days of sale of the real estate in this case, the non-party 3, the witness at the time of the above sale contract, and the plaintiff notified the non-party 4, the plaintiff, who is the defendant, of the above sale and purchase. Thus, if the non-party 4 did not take without delay after hearing the above sale and purchase facts, the defendant's family council was able to convene a family council for cancellation or ratification of the above sale and purchase acts at a prompt time than 3 years prior to February 28, 1978, 1975, the date when the defendant's family council had cancelled the above sale and purchase acts. Thus, the court below erred in the misapprehension of Article 146 of the Civil Act from the date on which the above non-party 4 knew the above sale and purchase facts, which could not have any influence on the date of signing a family council or ratification of the above sale and purchase acts.

The following grounds of appeal are that Article 967 (3) of the Civil Code provides for the case where a written resolution is adopted under Article 967 (3) of the Civil Code, which is pointed out in the second ground of appeal, by following the procedure under Article 966 of the Civil Code, and the court convened and the family council member convened without gathering the date and time of the convocation. Thus, in this case where the defendant was the person who did not convene a court due to the convocation of the convocation procedure, there is no room to apply Article 967 (3) of the Civil Code to the case, and therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by

Justices Kang Jae-hee (Presiding Justice)