1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The plaintiff's representative C(D) is the total cost of litigation.

1. On March 2, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that: (a) on March 2, 2016, the FF building 501, 502, 503, and 504 on one parcel of land outside the Suwon-si Suwon-si E was sold to the Defendant at KRW 580 million; (b) among them, the Plaintiff agreed to substitute the Defendant for a 500,000 won unconstitutional money at the narrow road conference as of the end of every five years from the end of March 2016.

However, since the Defendant did not perform its duty to pay the missionary money to the above narrow roadsides association, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the purchase price of KRW 30 million according to the above sales contract (hereinafter “the instant sales contract”).

2. We examine, ex officio, whether the instant lawsuit is lawful or not, ex officio, as to the determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

Article 276 (1) of the Civil Act provides that "the management and disposition of property in general shall be made by a resolution of a general meeting of members", and Article 276 (2) does not provide for the same provision as the proviso of Article 265 or the proviso of Article 272 of the Civil Act that "any member may use and benefit from property in common in accordance with the articles of incorporation or any other rules" that he/she is entitled to act of preservation as if he/she were jointly owned or jointly owned by any non-corporate association. It is natural that such act is made naturally from the fact that the collective ownership, which is the form of ownership of an association that is not a corporation, is strong compared to the joint ownership or joint ownership, is not recognized

Therefore, a lawsuit concerning property collectively owned can only be instituted in the form of an indispensable co-litigation by an unincorporated association under its name through the procedure stipulated in its articles of association, etc. or a resolution of a general meeting of members, or by all its members as a party to the lawsuit, even if they were the representative of the association, or the members of the association were the

Even if the lawsuit cannot be a party to the lawsuit, and this legal principle is the same to the case where the lawsuit is brought as a preservation act of collective ownership property.

Supreme Court Decision 2004Da44971 Delivered on September 15, 2005