logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2013.12.26 2012다68156
공탁금출급청구권양도의사표시등
Text

The judgment below

Among them, the part of the defendant (appointed party) and the designated parties are reversed, and this part of the case is reversed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

The representative of a clan shall be appointed according to the rules or practices of the clan, and if there is no such rules or practices, the head of the clan or the head of the door shall convene and elect persons of age or older among the members of the clan, and if there is no rules or practices regarding appointment of the head of the clan, it is common customs to notify the existing members of the clan who have become the head of the clan or the head of the door and reside in the country and have been clearly residing in the country and to convene the general meeting of the clan, and to appoint the representative of the clan at the meeting,

(2) According to the records, the court below held the general meeting of a clan on April 5, 1995 and established the rules of a clan on April 5, 1995, according to the rules of a clan (No. 18) submitted by the plaintiff to the court of first instance, the amendment of the rules of a clan is stipulated to be approved by the general meeting after the resolution of the board of directors and the selection of the representative of a clan is not provided separately, according to the rules of a clan (No. 8) submitted to the court of first instance on April 5, 1995. According to the rules of a clan (No. 2009Da26596, Dec. 9, 2010), the members of a clan shall be elected by the general meeting and the amendment of the rules shall be made at the general meeting, and the members of an EU including the EU shall hold a clan on Nov. 9, 2008 and the amendment of the rules of a clan shall be prescribed in the amended rules.

Examining the above circumstances in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, it is difficult to view that the amended clan rules were amended by lawful procedures even if they are based on any of the clan rules submitted by the Plaintiff and the Defendant on April 5, 1995.

arrow