2016Na2013077 Invalidity, etc. of Delegation Resolution

1. A;

2. B

3. C.

4. D;

5. E.

6. F;

7. G.

8. H;

9. I

Plaintiffs (LLC) LLC et al.

Attorney Kim Jin-jin, Justice Kim Yong-sik, Justice Oi-hoon, and Lee Jin-ap

1. J;

Law Firm LLC et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Attorney Kim Yong-sik, Justice Park Yong-chul, and Justice

2. The Korea Religious Organization Lool;

Law Firm Kcel, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Attorney Lee Jae-hwan

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2015Gahap15042 Decided February 4, 2016

April 6, 2017

May 11, 2017

1. The plaintiffs' appeals against the defendants are all dismissed. 2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

A. As to Defendant K Religious Organization Lnoc: Around October 2003, it is confirmed that the resolution delegated by Defendant K Religious Organization Lnoca to Defendant J as a delegated pastor of Nonparty N church located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (the chairman of the party) is null and void.

B. As to Defendant J: Defendant J should not perform its duties as delegated pastors of the above Nuriwons (the president of the party branch).

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for this court will be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, because they are the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal or addition as follows:

2. Parts used or added;

A. Following the resolution of the third 18th 12,074 of the first 12,074 (which was approved by 11,652 of the 12,074) shall be added.

B. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the parts of the fifth to seventy and Twelve are as follows. In addition, Defendant J did not observe the procedures related to the shooting process under the U.S. Constitution (S). Nevertheless, on October 14, 1986, the Korea Labor Union affiliated with the U.S. religious order approved Defendant J as having followed the procedures related to the shooting process under the U.S. Constitution. Accordingly, the number of pastors against Defendant J of the U.S. religious order is null and void because the number of pastors against Defendant J of the Korea Labor Union affiliated with the U.S. religious order is deemed null and void because it did not comply with the requirements.

C. Since the court of first instance stated the false academic background of the fifth 17,18th 5th 17 and 18th 18th 7th 199, the part of the “permission to transfer to the defendant J of the said new teachers’ association is null and void in itself.” In addition, the defendant J submitted a letter of union recommendation, one of the relevant documents to be admitted to the new teachers’ school at this university around March 2002 and around March, which was submitted by the defendant J, to the new teachers’ association at this case’s religious order, which was falsely entered and submitted as the candidate for the membership of the XLL church at this case’s religious order. Accordingly, the defendant J was notified by the president of this university around December 2016.

(d) Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part "4.b. judgment" (Articles 10, 5, and 12, et al.) shall be followed as follows.

B. Determination

In light of the following circumstances, the evidence submitted by the plaintiffs is deemed to meet the requirements prescribed in Chapter 13 of Part 15 of the Constitution of the religious order of this case and the resolution to delegate the defendant J to the delegate pastor of the church of this case is made by the defendant J as well as the fact that the exercise of discretionary power based on the religious organization autonomy of this case is considerably lacking rationality or arbitrary exercise of discretionary power, and thus, it constitutes a case where the abuse of discretionary power based on the religious organization autonomy of this case is remarkably unreasonable and thus, it seriously violates the concept of justice if the exercise of discretionary power is accepted and avoided as it is as it is, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

1) As to the number of pastors belonging to the U.S. S. S. religious order

① On January 22, 1985, Defendant J received from the Ronosian conference affiliated with the U.S. Qu religious order the introduction of a new teaching staff. From around that time to August 1986, Defendant J provided a new teaching staff meeting affiliated with the U.S. Q Q religious order (V).

② At the time, Q Q and S order in the U.S. were recognized as mutually qualified, and Defendant J was recognized as having experienced in the establishment of the U.S. Q order and in the V church and received a pastor from the Telecommunication Association held on October 14, 1986. Furthermore, Defendant J was demoted from the following day to that of “two questions of the lessee, who read the 10th and 31 to 33th of the 33th of the 1950s sexual landscape in the meeting and read the 10th of the 25th of the 1986.”

③ The U.S. S religious assembly received and examined the minutes of the 1986 regular labor union meeting with respect to the Defendant J, and approved the result of the meeting without any reservation. Since April 12, 1989 to April 199, the Defendant J thereafter conducted the office of T Labor Union clerk and the office of the president of the T Labor Union for six months from April 28, 1997 (Evidence 22).

④ With respect to the fact-finding on the U.S. S. S religious order constitution committee, the U.S. religious order assembly council confirmed that the defendant J received a pastor on October 14, 1986 from the U.S. religious order Telecommunication Council, the defendant J responded to the purport that "There is a procedure such as "candidate, human status, and postshipship" in the U.S. religious order constitution, but in any case, a person who meets the requirements prescribed in the other religious order can accept the candidate for the U.S. Q Q."; "Tno council has a right to accept the candidate for the U.S. religious order"; "Tno council has decided to meet the requirements under the U.S. religious order by recognizing the fact that the defendant J served as a new student assisting the pastor in the V church, and that the U.S. religious order council did not raise any objection against it" (No objection to Eul evidence 36-1 and 2).

⑤ In addition, on March 15, 2016, the Labor-Management Association re-established a resolution to the effect that the 66th regular Labor-Management Association "it is confirmed that the defendant J was aware of it after the public announcement of the pastor in accordance with the procedure at the 7th regular Labor-Management Association."

(6) Religious orders which are religious organizations shall aim at maintaining the unique characteristics of the religious order, such as the contents of their doctrines, and the religious order within the religious order. Religious orders shall, if necessary for their existence objectives, establish, revise, and interpret the Constitution of the religious order, settle various disputes within the religious order, such as administrative disputes, and establish the qualification requirements for traders, such as pastors, and shall direct and supervise the branch church to which they belong (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da78990, Dec. 11, 2014).

According to the faith and identity of a religious order, a person who leads to religious activities and leads to confidence while carrying out his/her best role is the pastor, and whether he/she is appointed as a pastor, and the interpretation of the religious order is the core area of the freedom of religion guaranteed by Article 20 (1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, which is a matter concerning the autonomy within a religious order, which is a religious organization.

With regard to the resolution of a pastor by the U.S. T management council against the defendant J, it is a matter of the autonomy of the above union to examine whether the above union is entitled to receive a pastor from the defendant J in accordance with the U.S. S. religious order constitution, and the above union's assembly of the U.S. religious order as well as the above union's assembly of the U.S. religious order is judged to be valid.

2) As to the disposition of invalidation of passing by the president of 0 University to Defendant J

(A) The evidence Nos. 36, 55, 69, 99, and 3,22 evidence Nos. 36, 36, 55, 69, 3, and 3, and 22 of this Court; the results of the fact-finding on the president of the university on March 31, 2017 of this Court; the fact-finding on the Seoul Access Office of the court of first instance; and (1) Defendant J supported the 2002 transfer admission screening by the 0th class of the 0th class of the 0th class of the 0th class of the 0th class of the 0th class of the 0th class of the 0th class of the 0th class of the 0th class of the 0th class of the 0th class of the 0th class of the 2001 and 222; (2) Defendant J submitted the 201st class of the 20th class of the 3rd class of the 2016th class of the Y.

(B) However, according to each of the above evidence, the following circumstances are also acknowledged.

① The course of the title of the ten university new graduate school is not a regular master’s degree course and doctor’s degree course under education-related Acts and subordinate statutes, but a religious order officer under religious order’s religious order’s religious order’s religious order’s religious order’s religious order’s regular member qualification after undergoing robbery conducted by the general assembly of the pertinent religious order’s religious order’s religious order’s religious order’s religious order’s membership. Therefore, if a general assembly accepts pursuant to the Constitution of the first instance court’s Constitution, the course of the title is conducted by the above new graduate school’s educational training (as a result of inquiry about the president of the ten university of January 2, 201 in the first instance court). In other words, the course of the title is not a regular master’s degree course and doctor’s degree course under Article 15 of the Constitution of the said religious order’s religious order’s religious order’s religious order officer’s religious order’s religious order officer’s religious order’s religious order.

② Chapter 13 of Chapter 15 of the Constitution of the above religious order provides that “A school of the above religious order shall teach for not less than two years at the school of the K Religious Organization, and shall pass the public notice of the history of the general assembly.” However, even though it does not mean that a PP tree in other regions than Korea shall teach the above new school for not less than two years, it may be interpreted to the effect that it is required not to mean that it should teach the above new school course for not less than two years, but to undergo the course at a level equal to that that that can be achieved by two years or more.

In this case, the first instance court's inquiry into the president of 0 University on December 1, 2015, the reason why "if the first instance court's first instance court's first instance court's first instance court's first instance court's first instance court's first instance court's first instance court's first instance court's first instance court's first instance court's second year's first instance court's second instance court's second school's second year's second school's first instance court's second school's second school's academic background or degree can be recognized as having the corresponding academic background. In addition, if it is determined that the school's first instance court's second school's first instance court's first instance court's second school's second school's first instance court's second school's first instance court's second school's second school's second school's first instance court's second school's second school's second school's second school's second school's second school's second school'

In fact, according to the resolution of the general assembly of the instant religious order, approximately two weeks (one semester) was established within the said new school, and 1,124 persons completed the said short-term special course from 2009 to 2015.

0. On October 19, 2001, Defendant JJ is staying in the United States.

Then, taking into account the circumstances that no entry is possible on October 22, 199 on the date of the written test, the test supervisor conducted the test by facsimile transmission method and decided to leave the test supervisor to conduct the test, and the defendant J applied for the test in the United States on the date of the test.

Then, on October 26, 2001, the professor association of the graduate school of the college decided to be incorporated into the three-year course of the said graduate school in consideration of the results of entrance examination, completion of the first semester at the previous graduate school, and the academic background of the relevant new graduate school. Defendant J received one-year course and graduated from the research course of the said new graduate school on February 11, 2003 (the result of inquiry into the president of the said new graduate school on November 4, 2015 at the court of first instance) (4). Meanwhile, in the university, the research committee of the new graduate school was organized, investigated relevant matters on August 24, 201, following a resolution by the faculty committee of the new graduate school of the university of the first instance on August 27, 2016, the fact inquiry was made as to Defendant J on August 27, 2016 (the result of each of this Court’s approval on September 31, 2017).

However, this university responded to the fact-finding reply of the first instance court on November 4, 2015 to the President of 0 University, which held that "No problem has been discovered in the course of entering the religious order, and no document submitted by Defendant J at that time shall be kept for 14 years or more." In addition, on August 24, 2016, the minutes of the High School of 0 University shall be handled as prescribed by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs, and on October 26, 2016, the minutes of the High School Association of 10 (the minutes of the High School Association of 20th National Assembly of 5th, which were written as follows; the minutes of the High School Association of 20th, which were written as follows: "No person who consented to the appointment of a new religious order as a professor and recommended the appointment of professors as documents as well as the details of the resolution to nullify the appointment of Defendant J by the High Court of 10th National Assembly of 206.

However, the above religious order is issued with the authority to appoint pastors belonging to the above religious order in accordance with Chapter 4 of the Constitution. While Defendant J knows that it is the Zsons of the United States (U.S.) but Defendant J passed the public notice of the candidates for the religious order held on February 9, 1982 (Evidence A82). In addition, the above religious order has the authority to revise the Constitution of the Republic of Korea (However, the majority of the Labor Association and 2/3 or more of the voting number of the labor union are required to obtain the approval of the new religious order). From among the above religious order associations, the general assembly, which is the highest top-level voting body, is to follow the procedure of the new religious order's recommendation of the labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor union's labor.

⑤ Although Defendant J appears to have graduated from the above new school as of March 1, 2002, Defendant J stated that Defendant J graduated from the above new school as of March 1, 2002, Defendant J was not aware of the false entry as to whether Defendant J graduated from the high school. Moreover, Defendant J did not have any column for stating the academic background of high school in the application for entrance (Evidence A94-4). In addition, even if Defendant J graduated from a master’s degree course at the time of admission to a master’s degree course at the university of the new school of the university of the university of March 9, 1982 (Evidence A94-4 No. 11 of the evidence No. 4 of the evidence No. 11 of the evidence No. 94), the fact that Defendant J graduated from the college of AB (AB university).

④ After completing the course of study at the graduate school of theology of the pertinent university, Defendant J passed a public notice of robbery conducted by the general assembly of the above religious order in 2003 in accordance with the procedure stipulated in the Constitution of the instant religious order, and was granted the approval of robbery at the 64 regular labor union of Defendant Union on October 13, 2003.

Therefore, all of the plaintiffs' claims against the defendants of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is justified with this conclusion, the plaintiffs' appeal against the defendants shall be dismissed without any justifiable reasons.

The realization of the judge's judgment

Judges Kim Yong-han

Judges’ Trade Name

1) The right to the separation of churches is the right to maintain the confidence of the church or to maintain the order of the church. The right to administrative welfare (the political division of the church constitution) and the right to discipline (judicial right);

The right to a religious order is divided into the decentralization of the Constitution. The right to a religious order is not the right of an individual, but the branch of the church, the church, the union, the competition, and the general assembly.

It is the right.