(a) Change of the affiliated association and the division of a church of some scholars;

(b)in the case of church divisions, reversion and use of the church properties;

A. If the members of a church have a church belonging to, and some of their opinions conflict with each other, resolve to change the membership of the church and join the new association, but some of the members remains in the previous association, the original church shall be deemed to be divided into two churches which are members of the previous association and the new association, and the church shall be deemed to have been divided into two churches which are members of the new association by the members of the supporting association.

(b)In the case of the division of a church, if the church is originally divided, in preparation for the case of the division of the church, the church properties belong to the collective ownership of the members at the time of the division, and all members, including the members at the time of the division, including the new members, can continue to use the church properties which are the church properties at the time of the division, the church church buildings, etc.

Articles 275 and 276(2) of the Civil Act

A.B. (B) Supreme Court Decision 84Meu730 Decided February 8, 1985, Sept. 10, 1985, Decision 84Meu1262 Decided September 30, 1987, Decision 86Ma478 Decided March 22, 1988

[Judgment of the court below] Defendant 1 and 3 others (Attorney Seo-chul et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Respondent 1 and 10 others, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Daegu High Court Decision 87Na361 delivered on November 5, 1987

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the petitioner.

1. As to ground of appeal No. 1

If the members of a church belonging to a different religious order set up an association and some of the members of a church who belong to a different religious order agree with each other to move to a new association and join a new association, but some of the members who decided to move to the previous association still remains, the church itself shall not be deemed to have changed the association even if they belong to the majority. In this case, the original church shall be deemed to have been divided into two churches which belong to a new association by the members who agree to move to a new association (refer to the decision of June 30, 1987, 86Ma478). In a case where a church is divided, if the church head of the original church or other regulations generally approved in general provide for the ownership of the church properties in preparation for the division of a church in advance, but the church properties belong to the collective ownership of the members of the church at the time of the division (refer to the decision of October 30, 1985, 197; 206Ma4786, Aug. 27, 1986).

In this case, the court below held that the above church's 00 church's original 7th association was belonging to the 1st association of the members of the church, but the non-party 1's character and religious guidance were problematic among the members of the above 7th association, and 53 members including the Respondent, etc., were opened temporarily on July 10, 1986, and decided that the above 100 church's 7th association was belonging to the above 1st association of the members of the church, and that the above 2nd association was not belonging to the 1st association of the members of the church, and that the 2nd association of the above 7th association was not belonging to the 1st association of the members of the church, and that the 2nd association of the above 1st association of the members of the church was not belonging to the 9th association of the members of the church, and that the 2nd association of the above 2nd association and the members of the church were not belonging to the above 3th association of the members of the church.

2. As to ground of appeal No. 2

"The respondent shall not perform any act that obstructs the worship of the pastors dispatched from the Ulsan National Assembly of the Republic of Korea to Nonparty 3 and the head of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the non-party branch of the non-party branch of the non-party branch of the non-party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the Ulsan National Assembly" (the court of the first instance 86Ka4172) dismissed the application for provisional disposition by approving the non-party branch of the court of first instance, revoking the non-party branch of the non-party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party branch of the party."

However, in light of the fact that the applicant stated that the purport of the amended written request was necessary to realize it more clearly within the same scope as the prohibition of access to the church building, which is the original purport of the application, and that the respondent has withdrawn the objection that the corrected purport of the claim is an unreasonable application to modify the basis of the claim, it is reasonable to deem that the corrected purport of the claim is the same as the cost disposition decision, but it is nothing more clearly than that of the purport of the application. Therefore, the court below did not follow the corrected purport of the claim, and determined that the above purport of the written request prior to the correction was stated as it is, and therefore, it did not err in the misapprehension of judgment or incomplete deliberation like the theory of lawsuit.

The issue is groundless.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)