1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Plaintiff B religious organization (hereinafter “Plaintiff Religious organization”) is a religious organization established by G around May 5, 1947; and Plaintiff A (hereinafter “Plaintiff Foundation”) is an incorporated foundation established on June 26, 1969 to maintain and manage the property created by Plaintiff Religious Order.

나. 피고는 원고 종단의 신도(도친)임과 동시에 출가하여 원고 종단에서 머물고 생활하면서 예불을 드리는 사신자(捨身者)이자 F법단의 주재(駐在)로서 발령받은 자로서 F법단 중 주재실에서 거주하면서 수행하고 있다.

C. On January 5, 2016, Plaintiff Religious Group issued a title No. 1 of the Governor Jeon Soo-young expulsion that orders the Defendant to be expelled from the Plaintiff Religious Group, and that the Defendant was expelled from the Plaintiff Religious Group by sending H (legal title I) and J as its representative, and the Defendant was expelled from the Plaintiff Religious Group, and implemented the measures to leave from the FJ Group.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 18, 28 through 30, Eul evidence 7 through 10, Eul evidence 7 to the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the defendant's main defense of safety

A. The defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case concerning the internal relations of religious organizations is not subject to judicial review.

However, the instant lawsuit is in depth related to the interpretation of religious doctrine or religion.

As a matter of whether expulsion against the defendant is legitimate in relation to the management of the FJ building, it cannot be concluded that it is a matter of internal relationship with a religious organization.

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant's argument.

B. Whether the lawsuit by the Plaintiff Foundation is unlawful due to the lack of the resolution by the board of directors of the Plaintiff Foundation, the Defendant’s filing of the lawsuit in this case by the Plaintiff Foundation constitutes the resolution by the board of directors set forth in the Plaintiff Foundation, but the Plaintiff Foundation did not pass a resolution by