[1] The validity of a resolution on the disposition of clan property at the general meeting of a clan which excludes a minor clan member from being distributed or whose resolution is remarkably unfair (negative)

[2] The case holding that a resolution of the general meeting of a clan regarding the disposition of the clan property is valid within a reasonable scope, since it was decided to distribute the clan property differently to the deceased, spouse, a member of the clan, a disabled, a minor, or a minor member of the non-school to the minor member

[3] The validity of a resolution on the disposition of the clan property at the general meeting of the clan, which decided to divide the clan property to the clan members who have different surname or surname and married female clan members

[4] The method by which a clan member exercises his right to claim the distribution of clan property

[1] In disposing of or distributing a clan property to an individual, the legal principles of trust (the property of a clan shall be managed and disposed of by the clan in accordance with its trust purpose, as it was trusted to the clan for the conduct of the religious services and for the benefit of the entire descendants of the common ancestor) shall be inferred, and it shall be distributed in accordance with reasonable criteria to the members of the common ancestor including minors, and it shall not be permitted to distribute the clan property only to the members of the adult male clan. Therefore, a resolution that only distributes the clan property to the members of the adult female clan except the minors shall not be allowed, and if the contents of the resolution about the disposition of the clan property are remarkably unfair in light of all the circumstances, the resolution about the disposition of the clan property shall not be allowed.

[2] The case holding that a resolution on the disposition of the clan property of the clan general meeting shall be valid within a reasonable range, since the property of the clan is equally distributed to the male and female who are not the head of the household, and that the resolution on the disposition of the clan property of the clan general meeting shall be made to distribute it to the deceased, spouse, the women of the clan, the disabled

[3] Although there may be room to view that a resolution of the general meeting of clans on the disposal of the clan property, which has decided to divide the clan property to the male or the female clan members who have different clans, is an unreasonable discrimination against the non-permanent female members, a clan is a naturally created family group composed of the members for the purpose of protecting the graves of the common ancestor, conducting religious services, and enhancing their friendship among the members. However, it may be allowed to differentiate the households comprised of the households consisting of the members consisting of the members who share the common ancestor and the descendants who are members of the other clan and resulting in the descendants of the other clan by marriage with the descendants of the other clans, which are composed of the members of the clans centered on the father's blood relatives.

[4] Since a clan property can be distributed only by a resolution of the general meeting of the clan, a member of the clan can only have a legitimate resolution of distribution and claim distribution according to such resolution, and even without a separate resolution of distribution, the clan property naturally belongs to the members of the clan, and therefore, the member of the clan cannot claim payment of the amount corresponding to the share of the clan.

[1] Articles 275 and 276 of the Civil Act / [2] Articles 275 and 276 of the Civil Act / [3] Articles 275 and 276 of the Civil Act / [4] Articles 275 and 276 of the Civil Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 2002Da68034 decided Jun. 27, 2003 (Gong2003Ha, 1605) Supreme Court en banc Decision 2002Da1178 decided Jul. 21, 2005 (Gong2005Ha, 1326) / [4] Supreme Court Decision 94Da31020 decided Aug. 22, 1995 (Gong1995Ha, 3233), Supreme Court Decision 95Da3579, 3586 decided Mar. 26, 1996 (Gong196Sang, 1372), Supreme Court Decision 97Da21277 decided Oct. 14, 197 (Gong197Ha, 3458)

Kim Yong-ro and 26 others (Law Firm LLC, Attorneys Lee Young-young, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

1. From the perspective of the Act on the Protection and Guarantee of Secrecy and the Protection and Guarantee of Secrecy and the Protection and Guarantee of Secrecy and the Protection and Guarantee of Secrecy

October 27, 2006

1. The defendant shall pay 15,00,000 won each to the plaintiff Kim Yong-ro, Kim Yong-ok (Plaintiff 2), Kim Yong-ok (Plaintiff 49-resident registration number omitted), Kim Yong-hee, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik (Plaintiff 25) (Plaintiff 25) (Plaintiff 25-resident registration number omitted), Kim Yong-hwan, and Kim Yong-American.

2. The claims of plaintiffs Kim Pung, Kim Yong (resident registration number omitted 9) (57 - 57), Kim Yong (Plaintiff 14), Kim Yong (Plaintiff 14 (resident registration number omitted 5- 55), Kim Yong (Plaintiff 16) (Plaintiff 16) (Plaintiff 64) (resident registration number omitted), Kim Jong-sung, Kim Jong-sung, Kim Jong-Un, Kim Jong-Un, Kim Jong-U, Kim Jong-U, Kim Yong-U, Kim Jong-U, Kim Yong-U (Plaintiff 24 (resident registration number omitted - 35) (Plaintiff 24) (Plaintiff 13 (resident registration number omitted), Kim Yong-U (Plaintiff 139) (hereinafter referred to as 39- resident registration number omitted), Kim Yong-Iak, Kim Yong-Ip, Kim Yong-Ip, Kim Yong-Ip, Kim Jong-Ip, Kim Jong-Ip, Kim Jong-Ip, Kim Jong-Ip, Kim Jong-Ip, Kim Jong-Ip, Kim Jong-U, Kim (Plaintiff 253 or below).).

3. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

On October 23, 2005, at the ordinary meeting of 2005, 5 billion won among the land expropriation compensation of 13,748,779,530 won which the defendant received from SH at the ordinary meeting of 2005, 5 billion won shall be paid to the independent household owners, and the decision to pay 4 billion won to non-households over 20 years of age and at least 20 years of age to his married children is null and void. The defendant confirms that the decision to pay 4 billion won to the plaintiff Kim Yong-ro, Kim Yong-ro (49-resident registration number omitted), Kim Yong-si (49-resident registration number omitted), Kim Yong-hee, Kim Yong-hee, Kim Yong-young, Kim Yong-young, Kim Il-young, Kim Il-young, Kim Jong-young, 482 won, 50 percent of the land expropriation compensation of 5 years of age and 20 years of age and above, 31,034, 50 percent of the resident registration number and 204 days of the Plaintiff, Kim Jong-U (hereinafter omitted omitted), -2, -364, -34, -1).

1. Basic facts

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or may be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the whole purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 through 25, Gap evidence 4, Eul evidence 1 through Eul evidence 6 (including additional number):

A. The defendant is the 13th finger-dong, Kim Jong-dong, the 13th finger-dong of the time-hak-dong of the Kim Jong-dong, the defendant is a common vessel, and the defendant is a clan whose descendants are men and women who are descendants, and the plaintiffs are women who are women who are descendants after the Kim Jong-dong's consent, and are the 16, 17, and 18th descendants of the 13th century.

B. In accordance with the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects, the land located in the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, which was owned by the Defendant, was expropriated in the SH Corporation. On June 2, 2005, the Defendant received KRW 13,748,779,530 from the above Corporation.

C. On May 22, 2005, the defendant organized a subcommittee (which shall be appointed by the board of directors composed of four directors and the chief director who is the representative of the clan) and decided to pay 9 billion won out of the compensation to the male households which form an independent household among the clan members on July 5, 2005, and decided to distribute 4 billion won to the female clan members or non-household members and five billion won to the householder, respectively.

D. On October 23, 2005, the Defendant convened a general meeting and made the following resolutions (hereinafter “instant general meeting resolution”). According to the rules of the Defendant, matters to be resolved by the general meeting include: (a) the establishment of a basic policy for achieving the purpose of a clan; (b) the acquisition and disposal of property; and (c) other matters to be submitted by the board of directors; (c) the general meeting is established with the attendance of 20 or more members; and (d) the general meeting shall pass a resolution with the consent of the majority of members present

(1) Of the compensation for confinement, 5 billion won shall be paid to an independent household owner and 4 billion won shall be paid to a non-household member aged 20 years or older and to a father aged 20 years or older (the provisions of the clan shall be amended to the effect that all the descendants of the clans shall be members of the clans of the non-household members aged 20 years or older and their descendants aged 20 years or older as of May 22, 2005, their attendance

(2) The board of directors (the appointment of a director in addition to an existing officer Kim Sung, Kim Tae, and Kim Yong-il) will make a decision on a specific matter based on the general meeting resolution in lieu of the general meeting resolution.

E. The Defendant’s board of directors passed a resolution with the consent of the majority of the registered directors (hereinafter “the resolution of the board of directors of this case”) on October 29, 2005, Oct. 9, 2005, and Nov. 26, 2005 on the distribution proposal of expropriation compensation (hereinafter “the resolution of this case”) with the consent of the majority of the registered directors (the board of directors shall be composed of the chief director and directors, and the resolution shall be made with the consent of the majority of the

(1) Each householder shall distribute to the householder KRW 38 million, to the non-household adults, to the non-households, to the non-resident, KRW 15 million, to the non-resident, to the non-resident, KRW 7 million each, to the minor attending the school, 4 million to the non-resident.

(2) householder: (1) A male born before May 22, 2005 on or before the date of May 22, 2005 as a head of the household: (2) no infant married as a head of the household as a head of the household as of May 22, 2005; (3) a head of the household, who was born after May 22, 1985, as a head of the relevant household, as a head of the relevant household; (4) a head of the relevant household, as a head of the relevant household, was registered as a head of the relevant household as a head of the relevant household; and (5) a head of the relevant household who was registered as a head of the relevant household as a head of the relevant household as a head of the relevant household as a head of the relevant household; and (5) a head of the relevant household who was registered as a head of the relevant household as a head of the relevant household as a head of the relevant household who was a head of the relevant household on or after the date of the relevant registration.

(3) Adult: The Domindong-Jin-Jin-Jin-Jin-Jin-Jin-Jin-Jin-Jin-Jin-Jin-Jin-Jin-Jin-P

(d) Outings: Women running out of the Republic of Korea as members of the Magdong Mag-Jak, Gin-Jak, Kim Jong-dong.

(5) A minor attending school: A person who was born on January 1, 1986 through December 31, 199, among the descendants of the Dobong-dong, Kim Jong-dong.

(6) A minor who did not attend school: A person who was born on January 1, 200 through December 31, 2005, among the descendants of the Dokdong-gu.

(7) A clan developer: A person who was born on December 31, 1935 (including the head of the clan and the support) before December 31, 1935, and contributed to the development of the clan as a member of the clan, which is a member of the clan of the Maim-dong and the male community of the same clan;

(8) Disability : To determine and pay a subsequent grade for the Haak Ge-Jak, Ge-Jak, Ge-Jak, Ge-Jak, under seventy years of age;

F. In accordance with the above distribution plan, the Defendant paid a total of KRW 4,750,00,000 to 125 households, KRW 72 to non-household adults, KRW 100 to non-household adults, KRW 77 to attend school, 31 to minor attending school, two children of the deceased non-resident, two children of the deceased non-resident, KRW 19, 105 to the deceased, and KRW 4,223,00,000 to 14 clans.

G. Meanwhile, among the 308 defendant Jong-won 308 members, the 297 members received money according to the above distribution proposal, but the plaintiff Kim Yong-ro, Kim Yong-ok (resident registration number omitted 49 - 49), Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik (hereinafter referred to as 53- resident registration number omitted), Kim Yong-sik, and Kim Yong-Un, which are distributed to them, are refused to receive KRW 15 million, notwithstanding the defendant's provision of implementation.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

Where the general meeting of a clan has decided to distribute the property of a clan to members of a clan who are not the original purpose of the clan (where it is used for preservation or activities of a clan in other forms), it shall immediately lose the status of the clan, and except in special circumstances, it shall equally revert to the members of the clan.

Therefore, although the defendant may resolve to distribute the compensation received according to the accommodation of the clan property to the clan members, the resolution of the general meeting to divide the compensation to the members of the clan is null and void by infringing on the equal share of the clan members unless the consent of the members of the clan to be disadvantaged thereby is obtained, contrary to the legal principles on collective ownership by infringing on the equal share of the clan members, and by discriminating against the women going out without reasonable grounds, thereby infringing the right of equality.

Therefore, the resolution that the defendant decided to distribute the land expropriation compensation of KRW 9 billion to the clan members is valid, but it is null and void to the extent that it infringes on the shares of female clan members, and it naturally returns to the adult male and female members at the time of the resolution to distribute the land expropriation compensation of KRW 31,034,482 (9 billion ± 290 won) according to the equal distribution to the plaintiffs (16,034,482 won for the relevant plaintiffs who received KRW 15,000,000).

B. Defendant’s assertion

The management and disposition of the clan properties shall be conducted in accordance with the resolution of the general meeting unless otherwise stipulated by the clan, and since the distribution of the compensation money of this case has been lawfully made in accordance with these procedures, it has been paid differently in consideration of all the circumstances, such as the degree of contribution to the clans, whether the householders are or not, the social and economic responsibility ability, age, etc., the method or contents of the distribution of the compensation money

In addition, since the right to claim payment according to the equal ratio is not created to the members of the clan without the resolution of the general meeting of the clan regarding the clan property, the plaintiffs' assertion that the resolution of the general meeting of this case is null and void, and at the same time, they cannot claim equal distribution of 9 billion won without the resolution of the general meeting of the

3. Determination

A. Determination as to the claim for nullification confirmation

(1) It is reasonable to view that not only the members of the clan but also the members of the clan shall be distributed in accordance with reasonable criteria, and that only the members of the clan shall not be allowed to distribute the property to the members of the clan, in accordance with the above legal principles. Therefore, a resolution to distribute the property of the clan only to the members of the clan who are not minors, but only the members of the clan shall not be allowed in accordance with the above legal principles, and that the resolution to distribute the property of the clan only to the members of the clan, which is remarkably unfair in light of all the circumstances, shall be null and void (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Da68034, Jun. 27, 2003; Supreme Court Decision 2002Da68034, Jun. 27, 2003; Supreme Court Decision 2003Da68034, Jun. 27, 2003).

(2) We turn back to the instant case and examine it in accordance with the above legal principles.

(A) Under the resolution of the instant general meeting, the criteria for allocation of compensation and its outline were set, and the method and amount of specific distribution were determined by the resolution of the board of directors delegated with authority. Therefore, this paper examined whether the resolution of the instant general meeting is null and void, including the resolution of the board of directors.

(B) The resolution to distribute a certain amount to the male and female who are not the head of household is equally distributed, and the resolution to distribute a certain amount to the deceased, spouse, clan development women, disabled, minors, and minors who are not attending school is valid within the reasonable scope in light of the above legal principles.

(C) However, the head of a family shall be paid KRW 38 million to the head of a family, and the head of a family and the married female clan members of the same clan (the plaintiffs of this case are married women at the time when the marriage between the same clans is prohibited: Provided, That on March 31, 2005, the amendment of Article 809 of the Civil Act prohibits the same clans from being married to the same clans, and only 15 million won are paid to the head of a family, there seems to be room to view that the payment of only KRW 15 million to the same clans is unreasonable discrimination on the outside of the family.

However, a clan is a naturally created clan group composed of natural members for the purpose of the protection of graves, religious services, friendship among members, etc. of the common ancestor, a household consisting of descendants who share the common ancestor with the common ancestor and the family consisting of female descendants, and a family consisting of the descendants of the other clan by marriage with the descendants of the other clan may be allowed if it is within a reasonable scope due to the characteristics of the clan consisting of the relatives by blood in the father.

From this point of view, the above resolution cannot be readily concluded from the point of view of gender equality, but it is insufficient to conclude that the resolution has exceeded the limit of the principle of private autonomy, or that the contents of the resolution are considerably unfair and invalid in light of all the circumstances.

(D) Therefore, the part of the claim seeking nullification of the resolution of the general assembly of this case and the resolution of this case based thereon is without merit.

B. Judgment on the claim for payment of money

The compensation of this case can be distributed only by a resolution of the clan general meeting, unless there are special circumstances with the property of a clan, and the plaintiffs can make the defendant make a legitimate resolution of distribution and claim distribution according to the resolution (see Supreme Court Decision 94Da31020, Aug. 22, 1995, etc.). The resolution of distribution itself, as alleged by the plaintiffs, is valid, and the resolution of distribution itself is naturally effective, and even without a separate specific resolution of distribution, it cannot be claimed against the clan for the payment of the amount equivalent to the share (the foregoing shall not be deemed null and void).

However, some of the plaintiffs who have not received shares pursuant to a resolution passed by the general meeting of clans may seek a payment of shares to the defendant on the basis of such resolution.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay 15,00,000 won each to the plaintiff Kim Yong-ro, Kim Yong-ok (hereinafter referred to as the "resident registration number omitted"), Kim Yong-hee, Kim Yong-hee, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik (hereinafter referred to as the "resident registration number omitted"), Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, and Kim Yong-si (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant's performance provision"), and thus, the above plaintiffs' payment of damages for delay can not

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the claim of this case of plaintiffs Kim Yong-ro, Kim Yong-si (hereinafter referred to as 49-resident registration number omitted), Kim Yong-hee, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si (hereinafter referred to as 53-resident registration number omitted), Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si (hereinafter referred to as 55- resident registration number omitted), Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-sung (64- resident registration number omitted), Kim Yong-si, Kim Jong-si, Kim Jong-si, Kim Yong-sik (hereinafter referred to as 35-resident registration number omitted), Kim Yong-si (hereinafter referred to as 39-resident registration number omitted), Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-si, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-sik, Kim Yong-Ipok, and the rest of reasons.

Judges Kim Jae-chul (Presiding Judge)