1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

(a) a lawsuit concerning collective property can only be brought in the form of an essential co-litigation in the name of the non-corporate body, subject to a resolution of the general meeting of members, or become all its constituent members, and a lawsuit brought by a non-corporate body without a resolution of the general meeting of members without a resolution of the general meeting of members is unlawful by holding special acceptance of the lawsuit;

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da64573, Jul. 26, 2007). In addition, a clan general meeting shall determine the scope of the members of the clan subject to notification for convocation by the clan, and give each person an opportunity to participate in meetings, discussions, and resolutions by individually giving notification to all the members of the clans who are able to be notified because their whereabouts are clearly residing in the Republic of Korea after determining the scope of the members of the clan subject to notification for convocation by the clan, unless there are any special circumstances.

B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da34982, Sept. 6, 2007)

In the instant case, each statement of Gap evidence Nos. 4, 5, 15-3, 4, and 16 is insufficient to determine the scope of the plaintiff's clan members subject to a notification notice by the family table, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise. Furthermore, according to the statement of Gap evidence No. 10-2, it appears that the plaintiff decided to file the instant lawsuit at the general meeting resolution of December 29, 2012, but there is no evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiff individually sent a notification to all the plaintiff's clan members who can be notified because their whereabouts in the Republic of Korea are clear at the time.

In light of the above circumstances, it is difficult to recognize that the Plaintiff had gone through a legitimate resolution of the general assembly regarding the instant lawsuit, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful because it was filed without the plaintiff's legitimate resolution.

2. If so, the instant lawsuit is unlawful and thus, it is ordered to be dismissed.