(a) Method of appointing the representative of a clan;

(b) A person who is entitled to convene a meeting of a sub-committee, if the person entitled to convene the meeting refuses to convene the meeting without any justifiable reason;

(c) Where the purchaser of land has had his grave installed ex post facto, the intention of the person concerned concerning the inheritance relationship of the land.

A. The appointment of a clan representative shall be governed by the clan rules or general practices, and if not, it shall be general customs that the head of the clan or the head of the door calls for a male who has attained majority among the clans and is selected by a resolution of the majority of the present members.

B. Although the members of a clan need to select their representatives for the management or disposition of the clan properties, they may call a meeting if they do not call the meeting without justifiable grounds by the convening authority.

C. It is consistent with our traditional thinking, unlike the case where one of the descendants independently purchased a grave site with personal funds and installed a early grave, it is rather consistent with our traditional thinking that he had the intention to have his descendants preserve the grave permanently with the collective property of a clan that is the collective ownership of his own group, rather than having his descendants dispose of it easily after the sole inheritance to the descendants.

A. Article 48 of the Civil Procedure Act: Articles 31, 71(c) of the Civil Act; Articles 105 and 996 (Removal by Law No. 4199, Jan. 13, 1990)

A. Supreme Court Decision 92Da18146 delivered on December 11, 1992 (Gong1993,445) (Gong1993,847) 91Da44902 delivered on January 26, 1993 (Gong1993,847), 92Da48796 delivered on March 12, 1993 (Gong1993,1169), 7Da654 delivered on June 13, 1978 (Gong1978,10945), 80Da1215 delivered on September 9, 1980 (Gong1980,13169), 92Da51372 delivered on March 12, 1993 (Gong193,197, 1970, 19509)

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 3 others, Counsel for defendant-appellee-appellant

Defendant 1 and four others

Daegu High Court Decision 91Na5182 delivered on November 5, 1992

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the defendants.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of the supplemental appellate brief filed after the lapse of the period for supplemental appellate brief).

1. A clan is not established only when a special organization or a sexual intercourse is established, which is a naturally created family association for the purpose of the protection of the graves of a common ancestor, the religious services, and the friendship among the members of a clan. The appointment of a clan representative is common customs that the head of the clan or the head of the clan calls for a majority of the members present at the clan and selects, if not, according to the rules or the general practices of the clan, it is common customs that the head of the clan or the head of the clan calls for a majority of the members present at the clan to elect a representative regarding the management or disposition of the clan properties. In addition, even though the members of the clan need to select a representative regarding the management or disposition of the clan properties, if the convening authority fails to call a meeting without justifiable reasons, he/she may call a meeting (see Supreme Court Decision 80Da1215 delivered on September 9,

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below accepted the reasoning of the judgment below that the number of members of the clan is about 216, which is naturally formed for the purpose of providing the above clans 29 years old, by making it difficult for the plaintiff to provide the name of the clans 29 years old, and that the number of members of the clans is about 216, which can be contacted with 190 members in Daegu Dong-gu and Seoul, and that the members who can communicate among them are scattered in the place of the clans 190, and there is no provision about the clans , and there is a custom that the members of the clans 1 represent the clans as the head of the clans , and there is no violation of the rules of evidence that the non-party 1 convened the meeting of the court below for the purpose of selecting the representative of the clans 1 (the non-party 1) and the non-party 1 (the non-party 1) who is the deceased non-party 1) and the non-party 2's meeting for convening 1's temporary selection of the plaintiff's clan.

2. In a case where a land-purchasingr had his own grave installed after the land, unlike the case where one of the subsequent descendants independently purchased the grave site with his own funds and installed it, it is more consistent with our traditional thinking that he had expressed his intention to preserve the grave permanently by making his descendants the collective property of a clan that he created the common ancestor rather than to make his descendants inherit it with his own funds and dispose of it later easily (see Supreme Court Decision 89Meu5680 delivered on September 26, 1989).

In this case, unless there are special circumstances to the contrary, the court below is just in finding the real estate of this case, which is the land purchased by the co-helper of the plaintiff's race as the land for the post-determination of the plaintiff's reputation and consolation land, as the collective ownership of the plaintiff's race, and there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles as to illegal acts or clan properties which are found to be erroneous in violation of the rules of evidence or by failing

In addition, as to the defendants' assertion that the confession of the defendants against the truth and based on mistake as to the fact that the offer of the name of the co-helper, a co-helper during the plaintiff's race, after the fact that the offer of the name of the plaintiff was to be asked later, is against the truth, the court below is just in holding that the court below rejected the revocation of the confession on the ground that there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the revocation of confession. All arguments are without merit.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Song Man-man (Presiding Justice)