Principle of Termination and Termination of Trust

In the case where there is a tomb for the common ancestor of the plaintiff clan and the member church among the forests and fields of this case, if the forests and fields are owned by the clan, it is the case that the clan is entrusted to the clan. Therefore, the plaintiff clan in the clan cannot be the truster of the forests and fields of this case, so it is impossible to terminate the trust to the defendant.

Article 547(1) of the Civil Act

clans of the Jeonju Pak-Sacol

Defendant 1 and one other (Attorney Yellow-in, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Jeonju District Court Decision 66Na172 delivered on September 30, 1966

The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Jeonju District Court Panel Division.

1. Judgment on the Defendants’ legal representative’ ground of appeal No. 1

According to the judgment of the court below, the forest land of this case is the co-ownership of 14th to 9th to 14th to 14th to 5th to 5th to 14th to 5th to 5th to 14th to 5th to 19th to 5th to 14th to 14th to 14th to 5th to 14th to 5th to 14th to 19 to 14 to 5th to 5th to 196 to 19 to 1, and the forest land of this case is the co-ownership of 5th to 4th to 14th to 14th to 5th to 5th to 197 to 1st to 1st to 1st to 196 to 19 to 19 to 19 to 1st to 19 to 20 to 20 to 200 to 20 to 202 to 202.

However, as the original judgment became final and conclusive, in the case where the graves of the plaintiff clan and the members of the clan exist in the forest land for this case, if the forests and fields are owned by the clan, and in the case of ordinary clans, trust from the clans is the ordinary clans, and if the original judgment is the same purport, trust from the clans is the common possession of the same clans, it is not possible to terminate trust with the defendant 1 because the plaintiff clans which is the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the plaintiff and the members of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the plaintiffs of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the clans of the plaintiffs of the clans of the clans of the clans of the two.

2. Determination on the grounds of appeal by the same agent and the grounds of appeal by the Defendants

According to the judgment of the court below, since the non-party 2, who is the relative owner of the defendant 1's acting on behalf of the defendant 1, sold the forest land to the defendant 2, and completed the registration of ownership transfer as of February 13, 1965, the defendant 2 can not acquire the ownership of the forest land after purchasing it from the non-party 2, and therefore, the plaintiff's claim seeking the cancellation of the registration is reasonable. However, if the plaintiff is not the truster of the above 1, the plaintiff's acting on behalf of the trustee of the defendant 1, it is not possible to request the cancellation of the registration as to the defendant 2, and even if the plaintiff's acting on behalf of the trustee of the above 1, the plaintiff's acting on behalf of the plaintiff 2, who is the above 1, it is not a legitimate reason to conclude that the plaintiff 1's acting on behalf of the trustee of the above 1, who is the title trust, had the ownership of the forest land to be preserved as of December 22, 1965.

Therefore, there is a reason for the argument, and the original judgment should not be removed from the original judgment.

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices of the Supreme Court Dog-gu (Presiding Judge) Dog-Jak and Mag-gu Mag-gu