2011Da93834 Registration of transfer of ownership

2011Da93841 (Consolidated) Transfer of Ownership

1. A;

2. B

C clans Association

Incheon District Court Decision 2010Na14148, 2010Na14155 decided October 11, 201

2) Judgment

February 27, 2014

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Incheon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. In a case where the issue arises as to whether a quorum or a quorum has been met in connection with the resolution of a general meeting, etc. of an incorporated association under the Civil Act and the issue arises as to whether a resolution has been made or whether the quorum or a quorum has been met, and where a corporate association submits the minutes containing the proceedings, guidelines, results, etc. of the proceedings, or the recording, video-recording materials, or recording records containing such proceedings, etc., whether the minutes, etc. are different from the facts, or whether the procedural requirements, such as the quorum for proceedings, are satisfied should be determined by the recording of the minutes, etc., unless there are special circumstances to deem that the probative value cannot be recognized due to an unduly editing or distorted editing or distortion of such minutes, etc. In addition, with respect to special circumstances to deny the probative value of such minutes, etc., such legal principles shall also apply to the minutes of a general meeting of a non-corporate foundation, such as a clan, etc. as well as the same applies to the minutes of the general meeting.

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below decided that the non-permanent sales agreement of the defendant clan 2 was 400 million won or less, and that the non-permanent sales agreement of the defendant clan 2 was 50 billion won or less, and that the non-permanent sales agreement of the defendant clan 2 was 400 million won or less, and that the non-permanent sales agreement of the defendant clan 2 was 50 billion won or less, and that the non-permanent sales agreement of the defendant clan 2 was 50 billion won or less (the non-permanent sales agreement of the defendant clan 2 was 400 million won or less, or that the non-permanent sales agreement of the defendant clan 2 was 40 billion won or less, and that the non-permanent sales agreement of the defendant clan 400 million won or less, and that the non-permanent sales agreement of the defendant clan 2 was 500 million won or less (the non-permanent sales agreement of the defendant clan 400 million won or less) was 500 million won or less.

3. However, we cannot agree with the above judgment of the court below.

A. First, we examine whether the resolution of the council of delegates of this case satisfies the quorum. According to the rules of this case, the similarity of the defendant clan is not only the representative of the clan but also the representative of the council (Article 8(1)), the council of delegates is composed of similaritys and representatives (Article 14(1)), and the resolution of the council of delegates is, in principle, decided with the attendance of the majority of the members and the consent of the majority of the members present (Article 15). However, the disposition of real estate owned by the defendant clans shall require the attendance of not less than 2/3 of the total number of the members of the council of delegates and the consent of not less than 2/3 of the members present (Article 20). Therefore, in light of the text of the above regulations, although it is not the representative of the council of delegates, there are voting rights of the council of delegates including the resolution of the disposal of the clan properties as the chairman of the council of delegates, and therefore, it is reasonable to include the similarity in judging whether the quorum of the defendant clans is satisfied.

Therefore, as recognized by the court below, even if only 30,00 members of H, N, and L among 5 representatives of the defendant clan were present at the time of the resolution of the board of representatives of this case, four of the six members of the board of representatives including similar D were present at the meeting, and the resolution of the board of representatives of this case satisfies the quorum requirements for the disposal of real estate of this case under the bylaws of this case.

B. We examine whether the resolution of the board of representatives of this case satisfies the quorum.

According to the records, the minutes of this case (A evidence 5) were submitted to the meeting of this case on April 3, 2007, at the Y located in the Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City X, to the meeting of the board of representatives of the defendant clan, and 6 persons, such as D, I, H, N, Q, L, etc. attend the meeting as a similar or representative, and the similar D, at the meeting, submitted a bill to adjust the contract price by 50,000 won per square year (hereinafter referred to as the "the agenda of this case"), and the names of the participants are written in the following order, and the signature and seal is written in the name of D, I, H, N, and Q, but there is no signature or seal on the side of L's name, and the fact that the defendant clan delivered the copy of the above minutes to the plaintiffs at that time.

Examining in light of the aforementioned legal principles, insofar as the instant case’s agenda is indicated as being resolved with the consent of all similar and representatives present at the meeting, it is reasonable to view that the instant agenda satisfies the quorum with the consent of four members, such as D, representatives H, N, L, etc. similar to the instant agenda, unless there are special circumstances.

In addition, the minutes of this case stated that there is no signature or seal on the name side of L of a representative L, and that the representative H does not have the signature or seal on the minutes of this case. However, the minutes of the board of representatives are originally prepared and kept by similar D and do not require the signature or seal of the representative present at the meeting of the board of representatives. ② The resolution of the board of representatives of this case was not made by a written resolution, and the representative omitted the signature or seal of some representatives, and it does not immediately mean that the representative did not agree on the agenda. ③ The minutes of this case contain the process and contents of the meeting after the completion of the meeting and the signature or seal of the participants. ③ If some participants have left the meeting of this case or received the signature or seal of the participants individually after or after the meeting, it is difficult to view that the minutes of this case contains the signature or seal of some delegates, and ④ the minutes of this case's signature or seal of this case's representative, even if it is difficult for them to prove the contents that it approved by all the participants, it is not a signature or seal of H.

C. Nevertheless, the lower court determined that the resolution of the board of representatives of this case was null and void on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, by failing to meet the meeting capacity and the quorum. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the probative value of the minutes of a clan, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion

4. Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Yong-deok

Justices Shin Jae-young in charge

Justices Lee Sang-hoon

Justices Kim Gin-young