[1] In a case where the representative of a church shall be a delegated pastor or temporary pastor who belongs to an association to which a church belongs under the leave of the church (hereinafter referred to as an "association"), whether a member who withdraws from the association without dispute over the illegality of the suspension of the association to which the church belongs shall be qualified as the representative of the church (affirmative)

[2] In the event that there is a legal dispute between the pastors and the members employed as the pastors of a church, whether there is a benefit for the members to seek the prohibition of interference with the religious life against the pastors by entering the church, etc. (affirmative)

[1] In a case where the representative of a church shall be a delegated pastor or temporary pastor who belongs to the association which belongs to the association (association) under the supervision of the church, he/she shall lose his/her qualification as the representative of the church, in case where the association of the association, to which the church belongs, has a defect in the decision that the association of the whole members of the association belongs be dismissed from the membership of the church and from the position of a pastor and the position of a pastor, and in case where he/she voluntarily withdraws from the association without dispute over the illegality of the decision on the suspension of duty in accordance with the procedure stipulated in the Constitution of the association.

[2] The church building owned by the church belongs to the collective ownership of the members, the members use and profit from the church building which is the object of the right to collective ownership within the extent of the purpose of the church activities, and since the most important method to use and profit from the church property is the act of worship, even though there is a legal dispute between the pastors and the members who are employed as the members of the church, access to the church building for the religious life, such as the worship in the church building, shall be allowed. Therefore, if the above pastors refuse the religious services by asserting that they are the members of the church and interfere with the religious activities of the members, the above pastors shall be able to seek prohibition of religious interference, such as access to the church building and the worship, etc.

[1] Articles 51, 52, and 64 of the Civil Procedure Act / [2] Articles 275 and 276 of the Civil Act

[Defendant-Appellee] The Korea Development Bank of Korea and one other (Attorney Gyeong-Gyeong et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee)

Defendant (Attorney Yang Sung-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

September 27, 2006

1. The defendant,

A. To issue an order to the Vice Diplomatic Association of Korea to the Plaintiff, each of the real estate listed in the attached Form 1;

B. Plaintiff 2 shall not interfere with Plaintiff 2’s entry into real estate listed in attached Table 1(a) or religious activities, such as worship.

2. The plaintiffs' remaining claims against the defendant are all dismissed.

3. The costs of lawsuit are divided into two parts, and one shall be borne by the plaintiffs, and the remainder by the defendant.

4. Paragraph 1 (a) above may be provisionally executed.

The purport of the claim of the supplementary church of the honorary plaintiff's provisional church: the judgment of the court below and the defendant shall implement the procedure to change the registration name of each motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet No. 2 to the supplementary church of the plaintiff's provisional church to the supplementary church of the plaintiff's provisional church in the name of the plaintiff 2.

The claim of the plaintiff 2 in the preliminary claim: the judgment of the court below and the defendant are ordered to order the plaintiff 2 to write down the real estate stated in attached Table 1(b).

1. Basic facts

A. The branch of the Korea Veterans Association of the Korea Veterans Association (hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiff church") is a church belonging to the Korea Veterans Association of the Korea Veterans Association, which is a member of the Korea Veterans Association of the Korea Veterans Association, and the defendant was dispatched from the above members' association in April 1993 to the members' association and was dispatched from the above members' association to the members' association in April 1995, and was employed as a member's company in accordance with attached Table 1A attached to that building while in office as the member's company, and the plaintiff 2 was in office as the head of the plaintiff church, and the defendant was provided with each motor vehicle listed in attached Table 2 from the plaintiff church in order to perform the duties of the plaintiff church, and was used after completing registration in his name.

B. Among the above, the defendant did not properly separate the church's finances and the defendant's individual finances, and the members centering on the plaintiff 2 shall be the public funds of the plaintiff church in December 2003, which are the public funds of the plaintiff church and let the defendant use the building as the company's house, and the part of the case expenses paid to the defendant shall be reduced, and the defendant shall bear the management expenses of the above company house.

C. Since the members of the defendant and the plaintiff 2 centered on the defendant and the plaintiff 2 begin to oppose each other, the above members of the labor association dispatched the non-party 1 pastor to resolve the conflicts of the plaintiff church in accordance with the above members' constitution, but still continued conflicts. Ultimately, on April 6, 2004, the Labor Association dismissed the defendant from the chairman of the labor association, dismissed the defendant from the office of the chairman of the labor association, suspended from the office of the head of the labor association, and dispatched the non-party 1 pastor to the chairman of the temporary labor association.

D. The Defendant, in response to the following decision, notified the above union that the Plaintiff church left the above union, and submitted an application for membership to the general assembly of the Korea Empician Association (Roster) for other religious orders. The Korea Empician Association (Roster) received the defendant's participation and notified the above union on April 13, 2004 after receiving the defendant's participation.

E. After that, on April 12, 2004, the Labor Association passed a resolution to remove the defendant who has joined another religious order on behalf of the non-party 1 who has expressed his intention, and to dispatch the non-party 2's pastors to the temporary chairman of the Plaintiff church and the standing pastors on behalf of the non-party 1 who has expressed his intention.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 4, 12, 13, and 25's entries and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination on the claims of plaintiff church

A. Judgment on the Defendant’s main defense

(1) The defendant argues to the effect that the lawsuit of this case filed by the non-party 2 as the representative of the plaintiff church is unlawful, since the suspension and removal of the standing pastors and the church membership against the defendant of the above union violates the procedure stipulated in the Constitution of the above union, and the representative of the plaintiff church is still the defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant submitted an application to attend the general meeting of the Egymnasium to the Egymnasium and the position of the above Egymnasium and dismissed by the Egymnasium, against the above decision, and the fact that the Egymnasium and the Egymnasium were approved by the Egymnasium general meeting of the Egymnasium. The representative of the plaintiff church, in principle, is the defendant as the delegated pastor or temporary pastor of the above Egymnasium who belongs to the Egymnasium and permitted by the Egymnasium. Thus, the defendant's defense is without merit, since he did not dispute the illegality of the above decision of Egymnasium and lost his qualification as the representative of the plaintiff church as long as he voluntarily withdraws from the Egymnasium

(2) Next, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff church's claim is unlawful since it was not decided to conduct litigation in the name of its representative as an act of preserving the property jointly owned by the plaintiff church.

In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in the statement of evidence Nos. 26 through 28, the temporary chairperson of the plaintiff church shall be notified to the members of the plaintiff church to convene a joint council on Feb. 26, 2006, and the joint council shall be held on Feb. 26, 2006. The above joint council shall receive each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 from the defendant, and the defendant shall request the change of the registered name of each motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet No. 2 from the defendant to the plaintiff No. 2.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the above joint meeting is not convened by a person with legitimate authority, but is null and void. However, the defendant's argument itself is that the representative of the plaintiff church is a member of the church as a member of the church, and the fact that the convening of the joint meeting belongs to the authority of the chairperson of the party does not conflict between the parties, and the non-party 2 has a legitimate authority to convene the joint meeting as a member of the temporary president and the member of the council, so the defendant's above principal safety defense is therefore groundless.

B. Determination as to each real estate’s explanation claim in the separate sheet No. 1

According to the above facts, each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 is registered in the name of the plaintiff church or newly constructed in exchange for the expenses of the plaintiff church, and the defendant is no longer a member of the plaintiff church, and thus, he lost the right to use each real estate listed in the separate sheet provided by the plaintiff church as a wedding or a company house. Therefore, the defendant has a duty to order each building listed in the separate sheet to seek such name for the preservation of the above property.

C. Determination as to the claim for the change of the registered name of each motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet No. 2

The plaintiff church, like the above, is no longer a member of the plaintiff church, and thus the defendant lost the right to use the motor vehicles listed in the attached Table 2, which the plaintiff church provided. Thus, as decided at the joint council of February 26, 2006, the defendant claimed to change his registered name to the plaintiff 2, but the defendant is not obligated to transfer the registered name of the motor vehicle listed in the attached Table to the plaintiff church, as argued by the plaintiff church, unless there is any ground to be bound by the resolution of the above joint council, it shall not be obligated to change the registered name to the plaintiff 2 unilaterally designated by the plaintiff church, as argued by the plaintiff church. Therefore, the above argument of the plaintiff church is without merit.

3. Determination as to the plaintiff 2's claim

A. Determination as to the claim for the specification of a building

(1) First of all, the defendant asserts that the lawsuit concerning the collective ownership of the property of the plaintiff church under the name of the church itself, which is an unincorporated association, or all the members of that church are parties to the lawsuit, and that the lawsuit of this case filed by the plaintiff 2 individual is unlawful. However, the plaintiff 2's claim asserted that he is the owner of the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 B B, and sought an order against the defendant as a claim for the exclusion of interference based on the ownership. Thus, the defendant's above defense

(2) However, as seen earlier, the real estate stated in Schedule 1(b) of the attached Table 1 is a new construction by the Plaintiff church in the cost, and the Plaintiff church acquired its ownership. Therefore, the claim for this part on the premise that Plaintiff 2 is the owner of the above real estate is without merit.

B. Determination as to the claim for prohibition of interference with worship

The building indicated in the attached Table 1. A, which is owned by the plaintiff church, belongs to the collective ownership of the members, the plaintiff 2, one of the members, can use and profit from the above building which is the object of collective ownership within the scope of the purpose of the church activities, and the most important method to use and profit from the church properties, is the act of worship. Thus, even if there is a legal dispute between the plaintiffs and the defendant, it is necessary to permit the plaintiff 2 to enter the above building for the religious life, such as worship, etc. of the above building. As long as the defendant's refusal of the name of each real estate listed in the attached Table 1. A against the plaintiff church and interfere with the activities of worship of the members, the plaintiff 2 has the interest to seek against the defendant the prohibition of interference with the religious life, such as access to the real estate listed in the attached Table 1(a) of the plaintiff 2, and it is reasonable to use the above part of the claim by the plaintiff 2.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant ordered the Dogwon to the Dogwon Association of Korea to issue an order to the Dogwon Association of Attached Table 1, and the plaintiff 2 shall not interfere with the plaintiff 2's access to the real estate stated in Attached Table 1 A or his religious activities, such as worship. Thus, this part of the plaintiffs' claim is justified, and all of the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment] : Omission of Real Estate List and Automobile List]

Judges Shin Jae-il