Like in this case, the organization called the village association uses the legal term non-profit corporation. A non-profit corporation must follow the procedures specified in its articles of association or obtain approval through a general meeting to dispose of property, sell, or secure collateral. Therefore, the key point in this case is to verify whether the articles of association or general meeting procedures were properly followed during the collateral process. The claim is that the attendees of the general meeting have a list of names, but is it enough if they simply attended? Just having the general meeting is not sufficient; evidence is needed regarding the part where the organization borrows money using the real estate as collateral. Simply stating that something was done is somewhat lacking without evidence and proof of responsibility for that part.

I think we need some more information. Usually, we create things like meeting minutes. After that, we also do things like recordings, so that later on, any doubts or suspicions about the disposal can be supported. Typically, it is common to prepare such backup. From the perspective of a financial company that secures collateral, because non-corporate organizations often face many issues, it is common to request things like minutes or recordings. When the head exercises power, conflicts often arise. Why does this happen frequently? Well, generally speaking, non-corporate organizations such as village communities or groups often lack clear ownership. They have that kind of nature. Therefore, the term total assets is used in such cases.

It seems that the members, these people, lose interest, and the focus of supervision decreases. As a result, occasionally, representatives make decisions. For example, if a village head pledges the village community center for a loan of 600 million won, what happens if the loan is defaulted? The typical pattern of such incidents revolves around whether the general meeting resolution was legally valid. Attention is now shifting to this aspect. The village community and the creditor, which is now a financial company, will engage in legal battles to determine the validity of the mortgage. If the financial company wins the dispute, then the issue arises of who should repay the loan. If they lose, they may seek compensation from the person who mismanaged without the approval of the general meeting.

If that was legal, but if the village mayor does not pay, what happens? It was judged to be a legal loan. If the mayor does not pay, what happens? If it was a legal loan, then the village community must pay that money. However, if the mayor used it for the benefit of the village community, it would not be the mayor's personal responsibility. However, if the loan was obtained legally and used for personal purposes, then the individual may bear some civil and criminal responsibilities. How it was used is also an important decision. So, if it was used legally and the loan was used properly, when the mayor does not pay, it seems that the residents have to pay.

When it comes to being realized, it is a matter that the village council should take care of. So, since the village council is a non-profit corporation, as a non-profit corporation, it uses its assets to repay any debts it may have. Therefore, this is not an issue that individual residents of the village should personally take care of. However, if this is not truly repaid, could it be transferred to a bank, like the village hall? Yes, occasionally there are cases like that. The assets of the village council, whether it's a hall or other properties, may be put up for auction due to such circumstances. This can be determined depending on the validity of the matter. Currently, residents have accused the village chief of embezzlement and breach of trust. How will this unfold in the future? Well, the key point ultimately lies in going through the proper procedures of a general meeting resolution and obtaining a loan.

It seems that now the focus will be on whether the money received and the borrowed money were used properly for the village association. Ultimately, it will be determined based on what was discussed at the general meeting and whether there is objective evidence. In the future, not only in this village but also in other villages, how should residents who are wary of the village chief's unilateral actions act? Non-profit organizations like village associations generally do not have a clear owner, so the focus on supervision may be blurred due to being collective property. Therefore, incidents involving representatives may occur. To prevent such incidents, ultimately, each member should regularly check the property and actively participate in the general meetings for supervision.

마을회 재산에 대한 저당설정, 무효? 이장의 독단적인 행동?

안녕하십니까 최광석 변호사입니다. 

지난 20여년에 걸친 부동산분야에서의 특화된 지식과 경험으로 

고도의 전문적이면서도 합리적인 비용의 법률서비스를 제공하고자 합니다. 

아울러, 첨단화된 전자시스템과 조직화된 업무분담을 통해 

국내에서 가장 스마트한 법률서비스를 자신합니다.

마을회 재산에 대한 저당설정, 무효? 이장의 독단적인 행동?

마을회 재산에 대한 저당설정, 무효? 이장의 독단적인 행동?

스크립트