1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. Of the appeal costs, the part arising between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is the Plaintiff.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where the intervenor (hereinafter referred to as the intervenor) further determines in paragraph (2) concerning the matters asserted while participating in the court in this court, and therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 4

2. Judgment on the Intervenor’s assertion

A. The summary of the argument (1) The intervenor is the representative of the defendant church and the person who was in the position of the standing pastor before C becomes the standing tree of the lawsuit.

Therefore, the intervenor has a benefit to dispute over the status of the present representative of the defendant church C.

In addition, the judgment of the court below that the intervenor did not have the interest in the lawsuit of this case on the ground that the intervenor was not a member should be revoked as long as the interest in the lawsuit

(2) The intervenor does not have consented to the appointment of the representative of the defendant church to C as to the merits of the case.

Since the intervenor did not permit or transfer the membership in the office of the defendant church to C, the status of the membership in the office of the defendant church still exists to the intervenor, and the status of the representative in the defendant church is not that of the defendant church to C.

B. Although a person who has a legal interest in seeking confirmation in a lawsuit for confirmation has standing to sue, whether there is a legal interest in seeking such confirmation shall be determined on the basis of the parties to the lawsuit, and the intervenor shall not seek judgment in his/her own name but conduct the lawsuit for winning one of the parties, so it shall not be deemed a party to the lawsuit.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 69Ma683, Oct. 18, 1969). Therefore, even if an intervenor has a legal interest in seeking confirmation as to the purport of the instant claim, the intervenor himself/herself seeks confirmation as the plaintiff.