1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. From April 2017 to January 6, 2019, the Plaintiff is a person who served as an assistant director of the Defendant church, a branch church affiliated with B religious organizations (hereinafter “instant religious order”).

B. The reasons why the Plaintiff was dismissed as the assistant pastor of the Defendant church are as follows.

1) The council members of the Defendant church shall be the Constitution of the General Assembly of the instant religious order (amended by May 31, 2018; hereinafter “former Constitution of the instant religious order”) at the time of the instant religious order in 2016.

(2) In the event that the Plaintiff cannot receive a wood case by falling under the age limit for the performance of duties of the Do governor under Article 42(5) of the Constitution, a resolution stating that “the Plaintiff’s age limit for the performance of duties, which became the retirement age of December 20, 2015, shall continue to run from the present church to the age of 65 (Article 42(5) of the Constitution)” (hereinafter referred to as “resolution for the extension of the age limit for the present case”).

2) On December 6, 2015, the council of the defendant church (hereinafter “the council of the defendant church”) passed a resolution on December 6, 2015 to the effect that “the plaintiff, who is the full-time death, shall be present at the seat of the defendant church” (hereinafter “the council of the case”). At the time, E, which was the member of the defendant church, filed a petition with the F Council of the instant religious order on January 12, 2016, for the number of the cases against the plaintiff, and delivered a letter of request to the plaintiff on January 13, 2016.

3) The general assembly of the instant religious order did not accept the Plaintiff’s petition on the basis of the general retirement age of the previous Dorians under the former Constitution. As six Grgs, including Frgs, jointly petitioned for a wooden case with respect to the age of the previous Dor and six members, including the Plaintiff, who were excluded from the subject of a wooden case with respect to the age of the previous Dorr, the re-deliberation of the Plaintiff’s petition for the number of the instant religious order. Accordingly, on December 4, 2016, the Defendant church’s council shall serve the Plaintiff as the father of the instant church after the completion of the instant religious order (hereinafter “instant reverse resolution”).

A. Before 200:

C. Meanwhile, on January 2, 2019, Defendant church members E shall resign from the office of the instant religious orderF council on January 3, 2019 after the church was convened on January 2, 2019.