Background
A clan association claimed that "this land is clan property registered in a clan member's name in title only," and sued our clients (the defendants), who held the land, seeking transfer of the shares together with payment of approximately KRW 170 million in related sums. Changchun represented our clients, the holders of the land.
The Issue — Are the Clan's Existence and the Title Trust Proven?
A party asserting a title trust must prove both ① that the clan actually existed as an association at the time ownership was acquired, and ② that a title trust agreement existed between that clan and the registered holder (Supreme Court 2018Da264628, among others). Even a naturally arising clan must have "substance as an association," forming common property and carrying on continuous activity.
How Changchun Helped
Changchun (attorney Donghwan Shin) impeached the claim item by item, showing ① that at the time the land was acquired the opposing clan had no substance as an association — no dues collection, no joint ancestral rites, no decision-making; and ② that the materials it relied on, such as bank transfer records and written confirmations, could not establish a title trust agreement. When a partial monetary award was made at first instance, we contested it on appeal.
Outcome
The appellate court set aside the portion of the first instance judgment adverse to our clients, dismissed the clan's claims in their entirety and dismissed the clan's appeal. The clan appealed to the Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court dismissed that appeal, confirming our clients' victory across all three instances.
A claim of "clan property" must pass through two gates: the clan's substance and a title trust agreement. The case shows that an unfavorable outcome at first instance can very much be reversed on appeal. (Outcomes may differ depending on the facts of each matter.)