The judgment below

Among them, the part against the Defendants is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded to the Jeonju District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Prior to the amendment by Act No. 10331, May 31, 2010, of the former Traditional Temples Preservation and Support Act

The Korean Traditional Temples Preservation and Support Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Korean Traditional Temples Act”)

Article 2, Article 9(1), (2), and (7) of the former Traditional Temple Preservation Act (amended by the Traditional Temples Preservation Act, Act No. 9473 of March 5, 2009), and Articles 2, 9(1), (2), and (7) of the former Traditional Temple Preservation Act, shall obtain permission from the competent authorities for the transfer, lease, or offering as security, of real estate owned by the representative organization within the boundaries of the traditional temple, and such transfer, lease, or offering as security against this provision shall be deemed null and void (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2002Da4550 of Nov. 13, 200; 203Da6735, Apr. 9, 2004; 203Da6735, Apr. 1, 2004; hereinafter referred to as “the Presidential Decree of the Korean Traditional Temples Preservation Act”). The term “land owned by the temple or its affiliated with the traditional Buddhist Temples Preservation Act” means the land prescribed by the Presidential Decree of the former Traditional Temple Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2136.