1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3.(a)

Plaintiff

A Religious organization and the defendant.

1. This part of the judgment of this court is based on the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. As to the claim of damages as stated in the claim on the ground that the plaintiffs' assertion of this case and the press dog of this case against the defendant damaged the plaintiffs' reputation by pointing out false facts, the defendant filed a prior objection to the merits that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, and thus, it will be examined as follows.

A. 1) The defendant asserts that the lawsuit in this case pertains to the collective ownership property of the plaintiffs, and the lawsuit in this case requires a resolution of the general meeting of members pursuant to Articles 278 and 276 of the Civil Act, and it is unlawful as it is filed without the resolution of the general meeting of members. Accordingly, the plaintiffs asserted that ① the lawsuit in this case is about personal rights, which are personal rights, and is not subject to collective ownership by the plaintiffs, and even if it is about collective property, it is not subject to collective ownership, and it is filed as an act of preservation, not an act of disposal or management of collective ownership. Thus, Article 276 of the Civil Act does not require a resolution of the general meeting of members. ② Even if the resolution of the general meeting of members is necessary, the lawsuit in this case is in the nature that the resolution of the general meeting of members is reflected in the opinion of all the members belonging to the plaintiffs, and ③ through the amendment of the charter and the resolution of the committee, the plaintiff A raised the lawsuit in this case as a legitimate resolution of the general meeting of members.