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

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against G with the Plaintiff’s representative fee indicated.

1. Determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the registration of ownership transfer on one-half share of H 7,537 square meters of H 7,537 square meters in Sejong City. As to this, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff was merely an organization higher than the Plaintiff’s organization for the instant lawsuit and did not have legitimate convocation procedures, and that the resolution is not effective.

B. The provisions of Article 265 of the Civil Act concerning the preservation of collective property cannot be applied to the preservation of collective ownership. Barring special circumstances, a resolution of a general meeting of members pursuant to Article 276(1) of the Civil Act shall be passed, barring special circumstances. Thus, even where a clan, which is an unincorporated association, files a lawsuit as preservation of collective property, it shall undergo a resolution of the general meeting of a clan

In holding a clan general meeting, each person shall be given an opportunity to participate in the meeting, discussion, and resolution by individually giving each person an opportunity to participate in the meeting, because the scope of the members of the clan, which are subject to notification for convocation, has been determined by the family council according to the family council, etc. and their whereabouts are clearly residing in the Republic of Korea, unless there are special circumstances. Therefore, a resolution at the general meeting of the clan held

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da83650 Decided February 11, 2010, etc.). C.

Judgment

In November 29, 2019, G, the Plaintiff’s representative, recognized that the instant lawsuit was brought by his descendants for the religious rites of the 124-year-old descendants, not the Plaintiff’s clans indicated by themselves, but for their descendants for the religious rites of the 124-year-old descendants, etc., and that the instant lawsuit is unlawful on the grounds that they are not qualified as the representative of the Plaintiff’s clans.

2. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices who reviewed the instant lawsuit.