beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On August 20, 1932 with respect to the instant forest land, the registration of ownership preservation was made in the name of the deceased F, which was the assistance of the Defendants, and on the same day, the registration of ownership transfer was made in the name of the Defendants as of June 5, 1932 under the name of the Obag net G.
B. On December 16, 2014, the Defendants completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of inheritance due to the division between August 27, 1938 and the Plaintiff’s agreement on August 27, 1938.
[Ground of recognition] Evidence No. 1 and No. 2
2. Determination on this safety defense
A. The defendant's defense to the effect that the defendant's principal safety defense does not have the substance of a clan as an organization that was made by the plaintiff for the lawsuit of this case, but does not have the substance of a clan as a non-corporate association, and therefore does not have the ability to do so.
B. A clan within its unique meaning is a naturally occurring family organization formed by descendants of a common ancestor for the purpose of protecting the graves of the ancestor, defending the tomb of the ancestor, promoting friendship among descendants, and is established by descendants at the same time as the death of the ancestor, even if there is no special organization.
However, if a non-corporate association has the ability to be a party in a civil lawsuit, it must have organization to a certain extent and be a representative (Article 52 of the Civil Procedure Act). Therefore, even a clan with an unique meaning of natural creation, it shall be recognized as a party ability to satisfy the requirements of a non-corporate association. This is related to the requirements for litigation and shall be determined at the time of the conclusion of arguments in the fact-finding court.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da95387, Mar. 25, 2010). In full view of each of the descriptions and arguments stated in Gap and Gap evidence Nos. 12 through 20 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the plaintiff is a 6th class H of Class A and then a 6th class H.