1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit is indicated as the representative of the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts J remitted Q a total of KRW 40 million, including KRW 30 million on January 20, 201 and KRW 10 million on January 21, 201, to Q.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 12-1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. On the ground that the Plaintiff had a duty to deposit KRW 40 million to Q by intention or negligence in accordance with the agreement of December 22, 2007, etc., the Defendant asserted that the instant lawsuit was unlawful since it was filed without a resolution of a clan general meeting.

B. The provisions of Article 265 of the Civil Act concerning the preservation of collective property cannot be applied to the preservation of collective property, and unless there are special circumstances, it shall undergo a resolution of the general members' meeting pursuant to Article 276 (1) of the Civil Act, so even where a clan which is not a juristic person files a lawsuit as an act of preserving the collective property, it shall undergo a resolution of the clan general meeting,

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da83650 Decided February 11, 2010). C.

The lawsuit of this case is an act of preserving jointly owned property as a lawsuit seeking the payment of money to be held by the plaintiff in the future. There is no evidence to acknowledge that there was a resolution of the plaintiff's clan general meeting regarding the filing of the lawsuit of this case. Thus, since the plaintiff (a clan made up of "T" after the plaintiff) and U-Vhovah (a friendship organization whose members are the married men and women who are the lineal descendants of "F," who are the lineal descendants of "V," and whose members are not less than 20 persons) are separate organizations, it cannot be deemed that there was a resolution of the plaintiff's general meeting on the filing of the lawsuit of this case even if it is assumed that there was a resolution of the above members' general meeting on the filing

The instant lawsuit is unlawful.

Therefore, the above defense is well-grounded.

3. Conclusion is unlawful and dismissed, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair as it has different conclusions.