2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The Diplomatic Association affiliated with B religious organizations is located in E at the time of the strike, and the name of the church was changed to “C Educational Association”.

(hereinafter “instant church”). (b)

The Defendant filed an application for seizure of corporeal movables under the Goyang Branch of the Jung-gu District Court 2015No. 4587 with a notary public of the instant church No. 610 on October 13, 2015, with the title of execution of a notarial deed, the principal of which is one billion won as a law firm’s title, and the execution officer enforced compulsory execution against each of the goods listed in the attached list at the location of the instant church.

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. On September 26, 2015, the Plaintiff acquired the “number 33 Sound Systems (Monitoring, Skackers, TV)” (hereinafter “the instant sound system”) from the Defendant’s compulsory execution from the instant church on September 26, 2015, and thus, the Defendant’s compulsory execution against the said goods owned by the Plaintiff should be denied.

B. The Defendant’s sound system belongs to the collective ownership of the properties of the instant church, and thus, even if it can be disposed of according to the church articles, it did not comply with such procedures, and thus, the Plaintiff is not a legitimate owner.

3. In the case of a church which is an organization of the members of the church, the property which is composed of the members' annual report, the contribution and other property which is composed of the members of the church shall belong to the collective ownership of the members of the church

Therefore, the disposal of the properties should follow the resolution of the general meeting consisting of the members of the church, in case where the articles of association or other rules of the church are not carried out.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 80Da2045, 2046, Dec. 9, 1980). According to the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 1, the Plaintiff prepared a transfer contract with the content that the Plaintiff would receive the instant sound system in lieu of the construction cost from F on September 26, 2015, in lieu of the construction cost.