The plaintiff is a church belonging to the Diplomatic Group D and its subordinate organization of the E Labor Association.

On September 22, 2014, the trial court of the A Religious Organization D General Assembly rendered a judgment against the defendant as follows (hereinafter “the judgment of the general assembly court of this case”).

The text of a judgment: It shall be restored to the original state that the E- Labor Association withdraws from office of the defendant.

Grounds for Judgment:

1. It is recognized that the Eno-Council trial party has an error in composition and decision.

2. The appellant is recognized as having held a joint meeting without a resolution of the party, even during his suspension from office.

3. The Defendant is expelled until the spring No. 2015, and the Plaintiff shall pay 20,000,000 won to the Defendant until the spring No. 2015.

On December 10, 2014, the A Religious Organization General Meeting asked the question as to whether the president of the ENom Union should restore the status of the defendant without conditions according to the above decision of the court of the above general meeting, and the above decision of the court of trial of the Enompi shall be deemed to be unlawful, and the dismissal and expulsion of the defendant should be deemed to be unlawful, and the defendant's joint meeting without the resolution of the Enompis shall be deemed to be unlawful, and since the decision of the court of trial of the above general meeting is determined as stipulated in Paragraph 3 of the reasoning of the judgment, the defendant issued a letter of change of name to the old time that the defendant wants to return to the original state and suspended the defendant's right to the plaintiff

On January 6, 2015, the E Labor Association notified the Defendant of “the Defendant’s authority to suspend the president’s authority to the Plaintiff,” and the Plaintiff’s president of the E Labor Association notified the Defendant of “F wood that was dispatched by E Labor Association.”

On February 25, 2015, the Assembly of Religious Organizations held on February 25, 2015, whether compulsory execution, which is the validity of the decision of the Assembly of this case and the validity of the decision of the Assembly of this case, is limited to the text of the decision of the Court of the above General Assembly, or as stated in the reasons, the defendant seems to have shown.