A clan is a natural group of the clan that consists of the descendants of a common ancestor who have attained majority or more among the descendants of a common ancestor and is relatively distinguishable from that of a common ancestor according to the determination of the common ancestor. Therefore, a single clan may be established by making a single person among the descendants of a common ancestor already formed as a group of the common ancestor.

A clan is a natural group of the clan that consists of the descendants of a common ancestor who have attained majority or more among the descendants of a common ancestor and is relatively distinguishable from that of a common ancestor according to the determination of the common ancestor. Therefore, a single clan may be established by making a single person among the descendants of a common ancestor already formed as a group of the common ancestor.

Article 48 of the Civil Procedure Act

Plaintiff clan

Defendant

Seoul Civil Area and Seoul High Court Decision 71Na182 delivered on May 12, 1972

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

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

According to the reasoning of the first decision, even if the plaintiff's non-party 1 (the non-party 6 members of the clan) was selected as the non-party 1 (the non-party 1 members of the clan omitted) and the non-party 6 members of the clan were selected as the non-party 1 members of the clan for the purpose of supporting the non-party 2 and the non-party 1 members of the clan in Seoul (the non-party 1 members of the non-party 2 and the non-party 1 members of the non-party 1 who were kept for the non-party 6 members of the clan for the non-party 1 and the non-party 6 members of the clan for the non-party 1 and the non-party 6 members of the clan for the non-party 1 and the non-party 6 members of the clan for the non-party 4 members of the clan for the non-party 6 members of the clan, the court below's decision that the non-party 6 members of the clan had no choice but to know the non-party 6 members of the clan.

No. 2 In full view of each evidence in the statement of the original judgment which recognized the facts concerning the establishment and existence of the plaintiff clans, the court below acknowledged the fact that the plaintiff clans had been established and the real estate of this case has been acquired as a clan property and continued to be paid after the acquisition thereof, and since the establishment or existence of the clans does not necessarily require a sexual opinion or an independent family opinion (see Supreme Court Decision 64Da1193, Aug. 24, 1965; Supreme Court Decision 64Da1193, Aug. 24, 1965). Since the plaintiff clans does not have an independent family opinion, it cannot be concluded that there was no fact that the plaintiff clans had been established, and there is no material to conclude that the testimony of the witness in the statement of the original judgment in the record is not possible. Accordingly, there is no error in the misapprehension of the logical rules such as the theory of lawsuit in the selection of evidence in the original judgment, and there is no ground for appeal.

It is common custom to appoint a representative as a majority of the members present at the meeting of the clan in general (see Supreme Court Decisions 429Da1193, Nov. 20, 1958; 64Da1193, Nov. 20, 4291; 66Da881, Feb. 20, 200). The appointment of a representative of the plaintiff's clan for the lawsuit of this case is without merit, and it is not possible to conclude that the plaintiff's clan did not exist before that of the plaintiff's clan. In addition, in light of the evidence and arguments adopted by the court below, it is possible to find that there was no head of the clan (or head of the door) during the plaintiff's clan before the appointment of the plaintiff's representative of this case according to the records, and the court below's decision that the appointment of the plaintiff's clan was legitimate from among the plaintiff's clan's non-permanent arguments and the reasons for the final appeal of this case from among the plaintiff's non-permanent arguments.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed by the assent of all participating judges, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judge Do-dong (Presiding Judge) of the Supreme Court