[1] Whether the qualification of a clan member in its unique meaning can be limited to residents in a specific region or members of a specific clan (negative)

[2] The register of lawsuits brought by a representative appointed by the general meeting of clans held after excluding some clan members (negative)

[1] The unique meaning of a clan does not require a special organization as a naturally created clan organization for the purpose of the protection of the graves of the common ancestor and the friendship among the members of the clan, but it does not require a special organization. Among the descendants of the common ancestor, the adult male who has become the members of the clan naturally and some of the members of the clan cannot be arbitrarily excluded from the members of the clan. Thus, if the resolution or the rules of the general meeting restrict the qualification of some members of the clan arbitrarily, the resolution or rules of the general meeting are null and void against the essence of the clan, and since there cannot be a clan consisting solely of the residents of a specific region or the members within a specific scope among the descendants of the common ancestor, it cannot be viewed as a clan in its original meaning, and if the members of the specific clan or the members of the clan among the descendants of the common ancestor consist only of the members of the specific region or the members of the clan belonging to the specific area among the descendants of the

[2] Since a resolution of appointment of a representative made by the board of directors pursuant to the resolution of the general meeting of a clan held without convening a notice to all clan members is null and void, the lawsuit filed by the representative is unlawful.

[1] Article 31 of the Civil Act, Article 48 of the Civil Procedure Act / [2] Article 31 of the Civil Act, Article 48 of the Civil Procedure Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 92Da16525 delivered on August 27, 1991 (Gong1991, 2428), Supreme Court Decision 92Da15048 delivered on September 22, 1992 (Gong1992, 2964) Supreme Court Decision 92Da30153 delivered on December 11, 1992 (Gong1993, 454), Supreme Court Decision 94Da4907 delivered on September 15, 1995 (Gong195Ha, 3375), Supreme Court Decision 95Da34842 delivered on February 13, 1996 (Gong196, 1939) (Gong296Da2961649 delivered on August 23, 196).

Magman's Magman's Republic of Korea

The Minister of Culture, Sports and Tourism (Attorney Lee Young-chul et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 94Na23038 delivered on July 7, 1995

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against Nonparty 4.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The unique meaning of a clan does not require a special organization as a clan organization, which is naturally created custom for the purpose of the number of graves for the common ancestor and the friendship among the members of the clan, and since some of the descendants of the common ancestor naturally become the members of the clan, it cannot be arbitrarily excluded from the members of the clan, if the resolution or rules of the general meeting of the clan restrict the qualification of some of the members of the clan arbitrarily, the resolution or rules of the general meeting shall be deemed null and void against the essence of the clan. Since the descendants of the common ancestor cannot be a clan consisting solely of the residents of a specific region or the members of the specific clan within the specific scope among the descendants of the common ancestor, it shall not be deemed to be a clan within its original meaning, and it shall not be deemed to be a clan if the members of the common ancestor consisted solely of the residents of the specific region or the members of the clan who belong to the specific clan from among the descendants of the common ancestor, and it is an established opinion of the members (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da38429, Feb. 19, 1929292, 192.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, since the non-party 1 was deprived of the non-party 4's members of the above clan as the non-party 19 members of the clan, the non-party 2's non-party 9 members of the above clan were the non-party 1's members of the clan, and the non-party 3 members of the non-party 1's clan were composed of three branch members of the non-party 4's non-party 9's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 9's non-party 9's non-party 1's non-party 4's non-party 9's non-party 1's non-party 9's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 4's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's member.

In light of the records, since the above special general meeting on March 24, 1991 was not lawfully convened, the above non-party 4, appointed by the resolution of the special general meeting, was just and acceptable to the judgment of the court below that the plaintiff is not a legitimate representative of the plaintiff, and there is no error of law in violation of the rules of evidence, such as theory of lawsuit, mistake of facts or incomplete hearing, or violation of the legal principles or precedents concerning the custom of clans. All arguments are without merit.

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and the costs of appeal shall be borne by the assent of all Justices who reviewed the appeal in accordance with Articles 99 and 98(2) of the Civil Procedure Act.

Justices Chocheon-sung (Presiding Justice)