1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. On March 29, 2018, the Diplomatic Association (hereinafter “instant church”) decided to hold a church meeting on March 29, 2018 to sell real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to the Defendant for KRW 1.2 billion.

Accordingly, on March 30, 2018, the instant church concluded a sales contract with the Defendant to sell the instant real estate in KRW 1.2 billion (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant real estate to the Defendant on the same day.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Although the disposition of the plaintiffs' assertion regarding the real estate of this case was a resolution of the common meeting of the church of this case, the church of this case has decided to sell the real estate of this case only by the resolution of the church without the resolution of the common meeting of this case, and the above resolution of the church of this case also becomes null and void as a resolution made by the parties who are not in the position of the members or the head of the church, and thus, it is also null and void.

Therefore, the plaintiffs, who are the members of the church of this case, seek confirmation of invalidity of the sales contract of this case against the defendant.

3. Determination on the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit

A. Article 276(1) of the Civil Act provides that "the management and disposition of a general property shall be made by a resolution of a general meeting of members" and Article 276(2) does not provide for the proviso of Article 265 or the proviso of Article 272 of the Civil Act that "any member may use and benefit from the property jointly owned by him/her in accordance with the articles of incorporation or any other rules," and that any act of preservation, like in the case of joint ownership or joint ownership, may be done by each member. It is natural that the collective ownership, which is the form of ownership of an association which is not a juristic person, is more collective ownership than that of joint ownership or joint ownership, and that the collective ownership of the members is not recognized.