1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the representative C.

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Although the forest of this case, which is the primary cause of claim, is owned by the Plaintiff, the Defendant arbitrarily completed the registration of preservation of ownership (hereinafter “registration of preservation of ownership of this case”) under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Transfer of Forest Ownership (amended by Act No. 2111 of May 21, 1969) with respect to the real estate of this case by the Changwon District Court Office No. 8056 of December 23, 1970, and the Defendant is obligated to cancel the registration of preservation of ownership of this case, which is null and void.

B. Even if the registration of ownership preservation of this case, which was a preliminary claim, is valid, the registration of ownership preservation of this case was based on the title trust agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant, and the plaintiff terminated the above title trust agreement with the delivery of the complaint of this case, and the defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure of ownership transfer for the reason of termination of

2. The defendant's defense prior to the merits

A. Although the Defendant’s instant lawsuit constitutes the act of preserving or managing collective ownership property, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit is unlawful as it filed the instant lawsuit without a resolution of the general meeting.

B. Unless otherwise stipulated in the articles of incorporation, the non-corporate group shall undergo a resolution of a general meeting of employees when filing a lawsuit concerning the property jointly owned by the non-corporate group. Thus, the lawsuit filed under its name without a resolution of such general meeting of employees is unlawful as it lacks the requirements for the lawsuit.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da97044, Jul. 28, 2011). Notwithstanding the Defendant’s defense prior to the Defendant’s merits, the Plaintiff did not make any assertion as to this, and the Plaintiff did not submit all the materials concerning the articles of incorporation or the resolution of the general assembly, etc., to recognize that the Plaintiff’s representative was authorized to file the instant lawsuit.

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful due to the deficiency of litigation requirements.