1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is a labor union under the Korea Culture and Arts Association, and the plaintiff is a person who served as a standing tree in the "Bridge" which belongs to the defendant.

B. On December 19, 2016, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff from office, following the procedure called “Defendant’s trial jurisdiction” in accordance with the Ordinance on the Disciplinary Powers of the Korea Arts Council (hereinafter “instant Disciplinary Ordinance”).

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition for dismissal,” and the decision on the instant disposition for dismissal is referred to as “the instant disposition for dismissal,” and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments as follows: (a) there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition; (b) Gap Nos. 1, 2, and Eul Nos. 1 through 5 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply); and (c) the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments.

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant issued a complaint and an explanatory note for the crime to the plaintiff pursuant to Article 20 (1) of the Ordinance on the Requisitioning of this case. The complaint and the explanatory note for the crime sent by the defendant did not reach the plaintiff.

The Plaintiff received only the second writ of summons (the notice of attendance) regarding the judgment of the instant authority from the Defendant.

The disposition of dismissal in this case is null and void, since it is a procedural defect that the plaintiff was unable to receive the most important complaint and a statement of evidence for the purpose of guaranteeing the right of defense.

3. Judgment on the Defendant’s main defense

A. 1) The Defendant’s assertion that the lawsuit in this case is subject to judicial review is a dispute over the validity of a disciplinary decision or dismissal from office, which constitutes a regulation inside the religious organization, and it is not subject to judicial review. Accordingly, the lawsuit in this case is unlawful. 2) Even if the lawsuit in this case is a disciplinary decision of the religious organization, there is a dispute over specific rights or legal relations in relation to the validity of the lawsuit, and if it is necessary to determine the validity of the lawsuit in this case before determining the validity of the claim, the contents of the judgment are not related to the interpretation of the religious doctrine.