1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

1) The Plaintiff is a church with the “principal church” in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and 61 local arts dividends across the country. 2) The Defendant, as the father of the Plaintiff church, was dispatched to the pastor in charge of the “Yansansansansansan Arts Distribution” (hereinafter “the instant wedding distribution”) which is one of the local arts dividends of the Plaintiff church, around February 2016.

The Plaintiff acquired the instant apartment on February 19, 2010, and used it as a company house for a pastor who was in charge of selling the instant wedding. 2) The Defendant transferred the instant apartment around May 19, 2016 to the instant apartment, and thereafter thereafter, occupied and used the instant apartment from around that time.

Plaintiff

Since the establishment of the Plaintiff church around 1969, D was in the position of supervision, which is the representative of the Plaintiff church. However, on January 3, 2013, it declared that on January 1, 2013, the Plaintiff church was dismissed from the supervision of the Plaintiff church, and that E, who is his own child, was delegated the supervision. 2) immediately after that, in accordance with the “Operational Principles,” which is the internal rules of the Plaintiff church, and the “Rules of the Business Affairs Council,” the procedures were conducted to confirm that the Plaintiff church was appointed as the latter representative on the premise of resignation of D’s representative.

E had been dismissed from the supervisory office on March 12, 2017 while performing the supervisory duties of the Plaintiff church since that time.

3) However, D, in fact, while performing the supervisory duties of the Plaintiff church on March 13, 2017 without taking a separate position after the resignation of E, appointed F as the chief secretary general, director general, and director of the religious conference co-operation office. On April 3, 2017, the Plaintiff church, including the Defendant, transferred the number of the Plaintiff church members, including the Defendant, to other local pre-sales, while taking personnel measures against the Defendant.

(hereinafter referred to as “the personnel measures of this case”) on the other hand.