1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the defendant in the appellate trial is as follows, except where the defendant added the judgment as set forth in the following 2.3. Therefore, it is consistent with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant’s assertion as to whether this safety defense (if any) exists, 1) is an O forest divided into 51,174 square meters in Pyeongtaek-si H forests and fields, 3,305 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

In order to get back the instant land from the Defendant, the instant lawsuit was filed, and the Defendant’s request for cancellation of ownership transfer registration as to the instant land (U.S. District Court Decision 2019Da12444 decided Apr. 1, 201; hereinafter “related case”).

(2) Since the lawsuit of this case is dismissed, in full view of the purport of the entire argument in the statement No. 22 of the plaintiff's written evidence No. 22, it can be acknowledged that the court of first instance rendered a judgment dismissing the above claim on June 4, 2020 by filing a claim against the defendant against the defendant, but on the other hand, the related case and this case are entirely different from the parties, the subject-matter of the lawsuit, and the scope of res judicata, and thus, the result of the related case cannot be deemed to affect the interests of the lawsuit of this case. Thus, the defendant's argument

B. On September 29, 2019, the Defendant asserted that the resolution of ratification was made by September 29, 2019, the Defendant: (a) specified 224 members on the basis of the 3rd published 2014 as 92 members; (b) notified the members who can contact by registered mail to convene an extraordinary general meeting; (c) held the extraordinary general meeting on September 29, 2019; and (d) re-Ratification the resolution of this case with the consent of all the 70 members who attended the said general meeting (including those who delegated voting rights) (hereinafter “the re-approval resolution of this case”).

The resolution of this case was in force from the beginning.

The defendant's clan Article 7 (1) of the defendant's clan rules is attendance of not less than 2/3 of all the members of the clan.