1. The plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. In order for a clan which is not a non-corporate body to file a lawsuit under its name, the resolution of the general meeting shall be required, and the lawsuit brought by the representative of a clan in the name of the clan without a resolution of the general meeting shall be unlawful by holding special authorization for filing a lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da64573, Jul. 26, 2007). The provisions of Article 265 of the Civil Act concerning the preservation of collective ownership shall not apply to the preservation of collective ownership, and unless there are special circumstances, the provisions of Article 265 of the Civil Act concerning the preservation of collective ownership shall not apply to the resolution of the general meeting of members pursuant to Article 276 (1) of the Civil Act. Thus, in case where a clan which is not a corporation

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Da17062 Delivered on December 27, 2007). In holding a general meeting, unless there are special circumstances, each of the members of the clan shall be given an opportunity to participate in meetings, discussions, and resolutions by individually giving notification to all the members of the clan who are clearly residing in the country after determining the scope of the members of the clan who are subject to notification of convening the general meeting and their whereabouts are clearly residing in the country, and so that each of the members of the clan shall be given an opportunity to participate in the meeting, discussion, and resolution by individually giving notification to all the members of the clan who are able to be notified because they are clearly residing in the country, and if it is impossible, the reasonable reason for such notification should be supported, and if it is not possible for the clan to convene the general meeting, the resolution of the general meeting shall be deemed null and void.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da17582, Jul. 6, 2000). In light of the above legal principles, each statement of evidence Nos. 8, 9, 14, 15, and 16 with respect to the instant case is sufficient enough for the Plaintiff to file the instant lawsuit or continue the instant lawsuit.