The property owned by a clan shall be subject to a resolution of the general meeting of the clan unless otherwise prescribed by the clan regulations concerning its management and disposition.

Since the property owned by the clan belongs to the collective ownership of the members of the clan, the management and disposition of the clan is first stipulated in the clan regulations, and the resolution of the general meeting of the clan shall be followed unless there is a clan regulations on this point. Therefore, even if the property of the clan is disposed of by the representative of the clan, its act is null and void without following such procedures

Article 275 of the Civil Act collective ownership of property

2018Gahap50604 Registration of transfer of ownership

○○ ○ ○○○ ○○

The Republic of Korea and four others

December 05, 2018

oly 22, 2019

1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the instant lawsuit seeking the implementation of the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of change of indication of the registered titleholder shall be dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff:

(a) Defendant Park Jong-A implements the procedure to register the cancellation of ownership transfer registration completed under No. 149789, Oct. 28, 2015, as******* Eup******* 3,167 square meters in relation to large 3*3,167 square meters;

B. Defendant KKK, Korea, redB, and thisCC expressed their intent to each accept with respect to the registration of cancellation of transfer of ownership as described in the above A.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit, 1/3 of the portion arising between the Plaintiff and Defendant LA is assessed against the Plaintiff, the remainder is assessed against the Defendant LA, and the remainder arising between the Plaintiff and the other Defendants, respectively.

Cheong-gu Office

Disposition No. 2 and Defendant Park Jong-A, as to the Plaintiff,**** Eup***** 3,167 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) **** district court***** Registry of October 28, 2015, followed the procedure for the cancellation of registration of change of a registered titleholder’s indication, which was completed as No. 149788.

1. Basic facts

A. The registration of change of the registered titleholder (hereinafter referred to as the "registration of change of the indication of this case") and *********************** the registration office of October 28, 2015, changed the representative of the plaintiff from GamD to Defendant Lamba (hereinafter referred to as the "registration of change of the indication of this case") and ******** the district court* registry*789 on October 28, 2015, which changed the name of the registered titleholder (hereinafter referred to as the "registration of change of the indication of this case") due to the change of the representative on June 25, 2015.

B. As to the instant real estate, on January 7, 2016, the registration of the provisional attachment (*** district court 2017Kadan2545 provisional attachment, claim amount KRW 100,000,000, the registration of the provisional attachment (*** district court 2017Kadan2545 provisional attachment, claim amount KRW 50,000) by Defendant HongB on December 22, 2017, the registration of the provisional attachment (** district court 2017Kadan2025044 provisional attachment, claim amount KRW 50,000) was completed on August 29, 201, respectively.

C. Meanwhile, on October 10, 2017 at the request of Defendant KKK Co., Ltd., Defendant***** a district court rendered a decision to commence the auction of real estate by around 2260 on October 10, 2017, and the record was completed on the same day.

D. As to Defendant Park Jong-A, on September 12, 2017 *** District Court 2016 Madan2** As adult guardian was decided to appoint Defendant Park Jung-Y as *.

[Reasons for Recognition] ○○ Defendant ParkA, KK, RedB: Confession (Article 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act)

○ Defendant Republic of Korea, thisCC: The absence of dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Since the registration of change of indication and transfer of ownership concerning the real estate of this case is an invalid registration made without a resolution of a legitimate clan general meeting of clans, Defendant Park Jong-A shall cancel each of the above registrations.

B. The remaining Defendants, based on the registration of transfer of ownership of this case which is null and void, have the obligation to accept the registration of cancellation of the Defendant Park Jong-A, since the registration of establishment of each of the following places, the registration of (a) seizure, etc. was completed.

3. Judgment of this case

Ex officio, we examine whether the part of defendant Park Park-A seeking the implementation of the procedure for registration of cancellation of registration of change of indication of a registered titleholder is legitimate.

If the registration of change of the indication of a registered titleholder has reached the result of expressing the identity of a registered titleholder, the former registered titleholder may seek the cancellation of such change against the new registered titleholder: Provided, That where the change of the indication was made within the extent that the identity of the registered titleholder is maintained, even if it was erroneous, it would result in the registration of change of the indication by submitting a prescribed document, and thus, it is not allowed to file a lawsuit for cancellation of such change of indication as there is no benefit of lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da9136, Mar. 15, 2012).

If the facts of recognition mentioned above and the grounds for registration of transfer of ownership in this case after the registration of change of indication in this case show that the plaintiff is the plaintiff and the person responsible for registration are the plaintiff, even if the plaintiff's transfer of ownership in this case's possession of the real estate in this case is changed, the indication of the registered titleholder is not the same indication indicating that the land in this case is the plaintiff's ownership and it does not impair the identity of the registered titleholder. Even if it was made without due process as alleged by the plaintiff, the error can be corrected by the method of registration of correction accompanied by the final conviction, etc., so it is not reasonable to seek implementation of the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of change of indication in this case by litigation.

Therefore, the part of the lawsuit in this case seeking the implementation of the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of change of indication of the registered titleholder is unlawful.

4. Judgment on the merits

A. Relevant legal principles

1) Since the property of a clan belongs to the collective ownership of members of the clan, it shall first follow the management and disposition of the clan as stipulated in the clan regulations, and since it shall follow the resolution of the general meeting of the clan unless it is stipulated in the clan regulations, even though it is the disposition of the clan property by the representative of the clan, it is null and void (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da57679, Feb. 8, 2002).

2) Unless there are special circumstances, a clan general meeting provides each person with an opportunity to participate in meetings, discussions, and resolutions by individually informing all the clan members of their whereabouts residing in the Republic of Korea after determining the scope of the clan members who are subject to notification for convening a clan meeting, and by individually convening a notification for all the clan members who are able to be residing in the Republic of Korea, and the resolution of the clan general meeting held without the lack of notification for convening a clan member has no effect, but the method of convening a notification shall not be necessarily required in writing directly, but shall be done orally or by telephone, and shall be only done by another clan member or by telephone (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da34982, Sept.

B. Determination as to the application for cancellation registration of ownership transfer

1) According to the following facts and circumstances recognized by the following facts and circumstances, it is recognized that Defendant Park Jong-A had completed the registration of ownership transfer of this case without going through lawful procedures such as a resolution of the general meeting of clans according to the rules of the Plaintiff clan.

A) According to Article 12(4) and (8) of the rules of the Plaintiff clan, at least 1/2 of the members shall be present at the general meeting, and at least 1/2 of the members shall be re-convened when the number of members falls short of the quorum, and amendments to the rules and changes in property shall be resolved

B) On October 28, 2015, when filing an application for the registration of ownership transfer of the instant real estate (hereinafter referred to as “the instant minutes”), Defendant Park Poe-A made a donation on October 20, 2015, with the grounds for registration as follows: ① donor: (i) donor; (ii) principal president and vice president of the Plaintiff; (iii) donee’s donation contract on October 20, 2015, which is the “Defendant Park Jong-A”; (iv) the person liable for registration; (iv) the person liable for registration’s registration; (v) the person liable for registration’s name; (v) the person liable for registration’s name; (v) the person liable for registration’s name; (v) the person liable for registration’s name; and (v) the proxy’s name (a) the minutes of the extraordinary general meeting (hereinafter referred to as “the minutes of this case”); (v) the person participating in the Park-A (President); (**2) the person liable for election advisory**** (public**) the meeting of Park***.

C) From among those whose seals and seals are affixed to the above documents submitted at the time of the registration of ownership transfer of this case, eight persons such as ParkF, etc., excluding the Defendant ParkF, etc. were written by self-written statements or testimony in this court, and issued a certificate of personal seal impression at the request of the Defendant Park F, etc., and stated that “it was not known about the extraordinary general meeting, minutes of this case, and transfer of the real estate of this case.”

2) On the other hand, in the method of resolution by the general meeting of clans, unless otherwise stipulated in the clan rules, a member of the clan may exercise his/her right to vote in writing (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Da20155, Feb. 25, 2000). However, eight persons, such as the above ParkF, etc., signed the meeting minutes without knowing the specific details on the transfer of the title of the real estate in this case, and therefore, the exercise of his/her right to vote in writing cannot be deemed valid.

3) Therefore, since the ownership transfer registration of this case is null and void, Defendant Park Jong-A is obligated to implement the procedure for registration cancellation of the ownership transfer registration of this case.

C. Determination as to the claim for declaration of intention of each acceptance

1) As seen earlier, since the ownership transfer registration of this case is null and void, Defendant KKK Ltd., Korea (a mortgagee), redB (a person holding a seizure right), and thisCC (a third party having interests in the registration is obligated to express his/her consent to the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration of this case.

2) As to this, Defendant Republic of Korea defenses that the Plaintiff ratified the transfer registration of the ownership of this case since it did not file a long complaint or civil lawsuit for a long time, and thus, according to the evidence adopted earlier, Gap evidence Nos. 10 and 11, and the purport of the whole arguments and arguments, at the time of the transfer registration of the ownership of this case, the Plaintiff clan did not engage in ordinary clan activities through the general assembly, etc., and the Plaintiff clan was not engaged in the business of clans at the time of the transfer registration of the ownership of this case ******* district court 2017ta 2*** the Plaintiff's decision to commence the sale of the real estate of this case was delivered, and immediately convened a clan general assembly to take procedures for preserving the property of the clans of this case on January 13, 2018, it is evident that the Plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case on January 31, 2018. Thus, the above assertion by Defendant Republic of Korea alone has no impliedly recognized the content of the act of this case, nor acknowledged it.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, among the lawsuits in this case, the part of the lawsuit in this case seeking the implementation of the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of change of the indication of the registered titleholder is dismissed as unlawful, and the remaining claims shall be accepted for the reasons thereof and it is so decided as per Disposition.