(a) The method of appointing the representative of a clan and the validity of the clan rules that stipulate that the resolution of a clan shall be passed by the majority of the members present (=effective)

B. Whether the exercise of voting right by proxy submission is permissible in the method of resolution by the general meeting of clans (affirmative)

A. In appointing a representative of a clan, it shall be in accordance with the rules of the clan or the common customs unless there is any rules or the clan custom, and it shall be decided by the majority of the present members by convening a meeting of the majority of the adult male who is notified of the clan members among the clans. In light of such general customs, the regulations of the clan shall not be deemed null and void on the ground that the resolution of the clan general meeting does not provide for the attendance of the majority of the members and the consent of the majority of the present members, and it shall be decided by the affirmative vote of the majority of the present members.

(b) In the method of resolution by the general meeting of clans, a member may exercise his/her right to vote in writing or by proxy, so it is also allowed to exercise his/her right to vote on the appointment, etc. of a representative of a clan in accordance with the proxy system for other members present without attending the general meeting.

A. Article 75 of the Civil Act, Article 48 of the Civil Procedure Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 92Da3885 delivered on May 8, 1992 (Gong1992, 1992), Supreme Court Decision 92Da18146 delivered on December 11, 1992 (Gong1993, 445) (Gong1993, 1992, 76) 91Da25383 delivered on November 8, 1991

Attorney Park Jong-sung, Counsel for the defendant-appellee-appellant

Defendant 1 and 6 Defendants, et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Daejeon District Court Decision 90Na5229 delivered on October 30, 1991

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the defendants.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. On the first ground for appeal

A clan is a naturally created clan organization with the purpose of protecting the graves of the clan and promoting friendship among its members and among the descendants of the common ancestor, and does not require special organization acts or the rules of sexual intercourse for its establishment (see Supreme Court Decision 92Da15048 delivered on September 22, 1992). In appointing the representative of a clan, it shall be in accordance with the general customs and customs unless there is any rules or customs, in which the head of the clan or the head of the door calls for more than the majority of the members who are notified of the clans, and it shall be in common customs of the Republic of Korea to elect the members of the clans as the majority of the members present at the general meeting without providing for the attendance of the majority of the members of the clans and for the consent of the majority of the members present at the general meeting, and it shall not be deemed that the regulations of the clans shall be null and void because they shall not be decided by a resolution of the majority of the members present at the general meeting of the clans and shall not be decided by the majority of the members present at the general meeting.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below held that the non-party 1's rules are invalid, and that the non-party 1's lawsuit of this case filed by the non-party 1 is unlawful, since the non-party 1 is not a legitimate representative. The plaintiff's clan has long been composed of the non-party 1's nine members' nine members' nine members' nine members' nine members' nine members' members' members for the purpose of protecting and removing the graves of the non-party 1, who were the representative of the non-party 1, the non-party 2, the head of the non-party 1, at the time of April 2, 1967, elected the non-party 1 as the chairperson of the non-party 1, who was present at the non-party 3's general meeting, or the non-party 1, who was allowed to hold the above general meeting only with the members present at the non-party 1, the non-party 1, who was not the representative of the non-party 1, the above general meeting.

2. On the second ground for appeal

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below held that the forest of this case was owned by the plaintiff clan 5, who is owned by the non-party 5, who is the joint ancestor of the plaintiff clan, inside and outside of the common ancestor of the plaintiff clan and the graves of the non-party 4, and registered the forest in his name on September 28, 1929, and was entrusted to the non-party 6 and managed by the non-party 7 until September 1970, the non-party 6 was entrusted to the non-party 7, and the non-party 8, who was the deceased non-party 5's heir at the expense of the plaintiff clan in 1975, and the registration procedure of preservation of ownership was completed as stated in the judgment of the court below concerning the above forest in the name of four persons, including the deceased non-party 8, the deceased non-party 5's heir, the representative of the above non-party 5, and there was no error in the rules of evidence or the records in finding that the above forest of this case was unlawful.

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 on the bench.