1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a clan that is made a joint group A and consists of descendants.

B. According to the Plaintiff’s family table compiled in 1992, according to C27 years old D’s family table, the Defendant described as E, E’s children, F’s children, and F’s children in sequence.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 3, purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Although Plaintiff C was the same as the Plaintiff in around 1994, in fact, I died, not G descendants, and I’s descendants installed his cemetery without the Plaintiff’s consent.

Since then, the descendants suggested that I would bring I to the Plaintiff as the Plaintiff’s head of the Plaintiff’s religious services, and prepared and submit I as if I were the same person as E, a processed human property, and I’s descendants, including the Defendant, were registered as the Plaintiff’s head of the religious service.

Therefore, the defendant is not a member of the plaintiff.

B. Since the E indicated in the Plaintiff’s supplementary report is the same as the Defendant’s father, the Defendant is an assistant member of the Plaintiff.

3. In order for a clan to clarify the scope of its members, a clan’s family clan or a door is produced and distributed by stating the blood transfusion, spouse, and personal records of all his/her descendants on the basis of the family clan’s view. Barring any special circumstance to deem that a family clan was fabricated, it would be in accordance with the empirical rule to believe that the entries in the family clan’s family register on blood transfusion were erroneous (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 96S67, Mar. 3, 1997). According to the above legal doctrine, the Plaintiff must prove that the entries in the family register were erroneous, but the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

4. Conclusion, the plaintiff.