1. The defendant shall order each point of the attached Form 3, 4, 5, 6, and 3 among the one story of real estate listed in the attached list to the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet.

B. As of the closing date of the instant pleading, the Defendant occupies and manages a part of 42 square meters in the ship (a) connected in order to each point of the real estate Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 3, and 42 square meters in the attached Form No. 3, 4, 5, 6, and 3 among the real estate No.

【Ground of recognition】 Each description and image of evidence Nos. 1, 34, 35 (including additional evidence) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In relation to this case where the plaintiff sought the return against the defendant who infringed on the plaintiff's ownership as the owner of the real estate of this case, the defendant raises a defense as follows.

① The instant real estate is registered as owned by the Plaintiff, but in fact, it is jointly owned by the C religious organization D church, and even if the owner of the instant real estate is the Plaintiff, according to the C religious organization’s constitution, the right to manage the instant real estate is the D religious organization’s above Diplomatic Association. Therefore, even though the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit by the resolution of the members belonging thereto, the instant lawsuit is unlawful.

② Since the Plaintiff’s representative E was subject to a one-year disciplinary measure from the General Assembly Trial Committee of Religious Organizations on March 26, 2015, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as there is no legitimate representation in the instant case.

On the other hand, the lawsuit of this case is a kind of exercise of the plaintiff's right to claim the removal of interference based on the plaintiff's ownership. Thus, even if the right to manage the real estate of this case exists in Diplomatic Council, the plaintiff, the owner of the real estate of this case, can voluntarily file the lawsuit of this case. Thus, the defendant's defense on the premise that the general meeting of a church exists, is without merit.

In addition, according to the statement No. 21, the representative E of the plaintiff shall be the General Assembly of C Religious Organizations on March 26, 2015.