1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the representative C.

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a clan comprised of DC members, and the Plaintiff’s representative E lacks a notification for convening a clan clan on September 30, 2016, and forged the seal of the clan members to donate one half of each of the real estate indicated in the separate sheet, to Defendant B and F, and completed the registration of ownership transfer, which is null and void and the Defendant’s registration of ownership transfer should be cancelled.

2. Judgment on the Defendant’s main defense

A. The main point of the argument is that the plaintiff does not set forth the scope of members of the clan as an organization voluntarily created by the deceased E to manage its own property, and six members including G are specified. Thus, the plaintiff cannot be viewed as a clan or similar organization, and the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as it is raised by a person incapable of being a party.

B. Determination 1) A clan is a naturally created family organization formed by descendants of a common ancestor for the purpose of protecting the graves of the common ancestor and promoting friendship between their descendants and descendants (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da26596, Dec. 9, 2010). The unique meaning of a clan does not require special organization acts or sexual inquiries, but it is not automatically established if the clan is a naturally created group, but only if the descendants of the common ancestor exist after the common ancestor, it shall be organized to the extent represented by the rules or customs of the clan and continuously performed by its members for the above purpose, and it can be recognized that its unique meaning is established only if the clan is organized to the extent that it is represented by the representative elected in accordance with the rules or customs of the clan and its members, and whether it constitutes its own purpose and meaning (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Da16525, Aug. 27, 191).