1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant (Plaintiff).

purport, purport, ..

1. On April 8, 2010, the Plaintiff’s final text of the judgment subject to a retrial filed a lawsuit against the Defendant clan seeking the cancellation of the registration of change of the indication of the registered titleholder stated in the purport of the purport of the instant real estate, which was recorded in the name of the Defendant clan, as a branch court of the Suwon District Court, No. 2010Gahap2751, and the said court rendered a judgment subject to a retrial that accepted the Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff on August 13, 2010, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 3, 2010

2. Where the representative of a non-corporate association’s non-corporate association seeks to conduct a procedural act concerning the disposal of collective property, a resolution of a general meeting of members shall be made pursuant to Article 276(1) of the Civil Act, barring any special circumstance. If a procedural act was conducted without such a resolution, it constitutes grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)3 of the Civil Procedure Act, where no special authorization necessary for conducting the procedural

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Da46600, Oct. 22, 199). The fact that V was present on the first day of pleading in the Suwon District Court case No. 2010Gahap2751, Jul. 16, 2010 on behalf of the defendant clan and stated that he did not dispute the plaintiff's assertion on the part of the plaintiff on July 16, 2010 is obvious in the record, and it is acknowledged that V did not undergo a resolution of the general meeting of the defendant's clan with respect to the disposal of the real estate in this case, taking into account the whole purport of arguments in the evidence No. 28, 29, and 87.

Therefore, there are grounds for retrial as stipulated in Article 451(1)3 of the Civil Procedure Act because the instant judgment subject to a retrial constitutes a defect in granting authority necessary for the representative to conduct litigation.

3. The plaintiff's door of judgment on the plaintiff's main safety defense was registered as the auditor of the defendant's clan around October 15, 1997, and was not appointed as auditor at the extraordinary general meeting around 2004. Thus, the lawsuit of retrial filed by W on behalf of the defendant's clan is brought by the defendant's clan.