beta
Text
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.
Reasons
1. Basic facts are the members of the C church, which is a branch church belonging to the Federation of the Korean Independent Association (hereinafter “instant church”), which is an incorporated association, and the fact that the defendant is the head of the instant church is no dispute between the parties.
2. The defendant's main defense and judgment
A. The instant lawsuit is seeking the return of the property jointly owned by the instant church against the Defendant, which is the member of the instant church, and the lawsuit concerning the property jointly owned by the non-corporate body can only be filed in the form of an essential co-litigation, either by the resolution of the general meeting in its name or by becoming the whole members of the association.
Therefore, the lawsuit of this case filed by the plaintiff, only one of the members of the church of this case, is unlawful.
B. Article 276(1) of the Civil Act provides that “the management and disposition of a general meeting shall be made by a resolution of a general meeting of members” and Article 276(2) of the same Act provides that “each member may use and make a profit from collective ownership in accordance with its articles of incorporation or any other rules.” It does not have the same provision as the proviso of Article 265 of the Civil Act or the proviso of Article 272 of the Civil Act that the preservation act may be performed by each member, such as in the case of joint ownership or joint ownership. This is a natural consequence from the fact that collective ownership, which is the form of ownership of an association which is not a juristic person, is strong compared to the joint ownership or joint ownership, and the collective ownership of the members is not recognized. Thus, a lawsuit on collective ownership can only be filed in the form of essential co-litigation in its name by an association which is not a juristic person, or all its members are parties thereto, and such legal doctrine is unlawful by failing to pass a resolution of a general meeting of members or by filing a lawsuit concerning a part of its members.