The case holding that the judgment of the court below which held that the land was purchased from the line of a clan for the protection of the graves of the relevant ancestor and the religious rites during the existence of the ancestor and held that the judgment of the court below was erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the time of establishment of the clan.

A clan is a naturally created organization which is formed by descendants of a common ancestor for the purpose of protecting the graves of the common ancestor and promoting friendship between descendants and the deceased's descendants at the same time. As such, a clan for the protection of the graves and the religious rites of the relevant group cannot exist during the existence of a clan. Thus, the judgment of the court below recognized that the non-party deceased, who is a common ancestor in the plaintiff's family, purchased the land of this case from the birth of the plaintiff's family member who was the non-party's family member, and that the plaintiff's family member was a title trust of the above non-party's grandchildren to the above non-party's family member for the purpose of protecting the graves of the common ancestor and promoting friendship among his descendants, it shall be determined as evidence by misapprehending the legal principles on the timing of establishment of the clan, thereby making a judgment of evidence.

Article 31 of the Civil Act, Article 187 of the Civil Procedure Act

Attorney Kim Yong-deok, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant from among the Jin-Jin-Jin Military Village colons

Jeonju District Court Decision 201Na1484 delivered on August 1, 201

Supreme Court Decision 88Meu10890 Decided March 14, 1989

Gwangju High Court Decision 89Na2058 delivered on November 29, 1989

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

The defendant's attorney's grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged the following facts: the forest of this case was originally purchased by the non-party 1, the co-help of the plaintiff's co-defendant in the plaintiff's door, and the plaintiff's door purchased the forest of this case from the plaintiff's door to the non-party 2 of the non-party 1, the grandchildren of the above purification rule, under title trust to the non-party 2 of the non-party 1, the non-party 2, the non-party 1, the plaintiff's title holder of the above purification rule; and the court below's co-Defendant 1, the plaintiff, who was the grandchildren of the above hospital, obtained a false certificate from the guarantor under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Ownership of Forest Land, to make a registration of preservation of ownership of the above forest of this case under the name of the Dong, and accordingly, the registration of ownership transfer was completed under the name of the co-Defendant 1 and the defendant's name in succession.

2. However, a clan is a naturally occurring family organization formed by descendants of the common ancestor for the purpose of protecting the graves of the ancestor and promoting friendship among their descendants, and is established by their descendants at the same time as the death of the ancestor. Thus, the clan for the purpose of protecting the graves of the ancestor and conducting religious rites cannot exist during the existence of the ancestor.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below, which is a joint ancestor in the plaintiff's literature, purchased the land of this case from the plaintiff's book among the plaintiff's book, which was subject to the discipline of the above purification rule, without any absence of the forest of this case before the birth of the plaintiff's book, and recognized that the plaintiff's book was under a title trust with the grandchildren of the above purification rule, etc., it cannot be deemed as a result of the judgment of evidence in light of the legal principles as to the time of establishment of the clan.

However, if the above purification rule is deemed to have purchased the forest land of this case in advance in the door for the plaintiff's question that will be established after his death, it is difficult to view it as above in light of the detailed evidence by the court below.

In other words, according to the records, the principal evidence supporting the judgment of the court below that recognized the forest of this case as a final childbirth in the plaintiff's paper is the contents of the "refluence hospital" in the name of the above purification rule among the memorial plates confirmed by the on-site inspection of the court of first instance, and the contents thereof are examined, it is difficult to view that the above purification rule provided the forest of this case as a clan clan's paper to be the subject of service, which is to be established after the death of the plaintiff.

In addition, according to the testimony of the witness of the court of first instance and the court of second instance employed by the court below, not only the parents and grandparents of the above purification rules are installed in the forest of this case, but also the fact that the above purification committee was installed with the funeral and the funeral of the above clan which belongs to the new and implied members, not in the plaintiff's member, is recognized. Therefore, such fact is also a obstacle to viewing the forest of this case as the dissolution of the clan for the above purification rules.

The court below did not review the above points in a more detailed manner, and recognized that the plaintiff was a title trust with the non-party deceased Jong-si Hospital, etc., which is an endin of the plaintiff's paper, which is the joint shipbuilding of the above purification rule. The court below committed an unlawful act that affected the conclusion of the judgment due to the determination of evidence in violation of the rules of evidence, which constitutes a ground for reversal under Article 12 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc.

3. Therefore, we reverse and remand the judgment of the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Sang-won (Presiding Justice) Lee Jong-won (Presiding Justice)