1. Of the instant lawsuit, a resolution to dismiss the Plaintiff from office on November 9, 2014 at the Gangseo-gu Seoul Labor Association (integrated).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The defendant church was established on February 9, 1997 and from May 2, 1998 to the Korean Association of Arts (integrated) (hereinafter referred to as the “instant religious order”) and was a branch church affiliated with the instant religious order. The defendant church is a member church of the instant religious order that had jurisdiction over the defendant church (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff's association”), and the plaintiff B was a member church of the instant religious order from December 9, 1997 to the defendant church's member church from February 26, 2006 to the defendant church's member church.

As seen below, although the defendant church decided to dismiss the plaintiff B from the office of delegation of the defendant church as of November 9, 2014 and the resolution was passed to leave the religious order of this case as of December 21, 2014, the plaintiff B still asserted that it is the delegated member of the defendant church and the chairman of the church (hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiff church").

(2) However, as seen below, the above dismissal resolution and the above withdrawal resolution are valid, and in the case of withdrawal from the religious order by meeting the requirements for a resolution to leave the religious order, the previous church still exists as a church that leaves the religious order (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2004Da37775, Apr. 20, 2006). Thus, the plaintiff church and the defendant church are the same non-corporate association).

Plaintiff

B has tried to merge between the defendant church and the defendant church since February 2014, and in the process, there was a dispute between the plaintiff B and the defendant church members.

C. On June 1, 2014, the head of the defendant church, the E and the F, were absent on June 1, 2014, a church conference was convened to convene a joint council (at the time, the head of the defendant church was the head of the defendant church, the two persons), and the above party council passed a resolution to convene a joint council, the agenda of which is to dismiss the plaintiff B from the office of delegation of the defendant church, was to dismiss the plaintiff B from the office of delegation of the defendant church.

Since then, E-ro and F-ro on June 9, 2014.