1. The plaintiff A religious organization D shall dismiss the lawsuit of the plaintiff A religious organization D.

2. The plaintiff at the Defendant’s Executive Board Committee on May 7, 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. The status of the parties 1) Plaintiff A Religious Organization D Diplomatic Association (hereinafter “Plaintiff church”)

A religious organization is an individual church belonging to a religious order. The organization of A religious organization is composed of a council, which is a council consisting of all the members registered in the meeting, its district council, local council, annual council, and general meeting. In the case of a district council to which the Plaintiff church belongs, only the Plaintiff church exists within the district council, and the local council supervising the organization and the district council in C community to which such Plaintiff church belongs is the defendant C local council. The remaining plaintiffs except the Plaintiff church are members of the district council, such as the right church and the head of the A religious organization (hereinafter referred to as the “patriarch and head of the church”), according to the doctrine and head of the A religious organization (hereinafter referred to as the “patriarch and head of the church”), the district council shall investigate and deal with the acquisition and disposal of real estate belonging to the church, such as the individual church, the housing, and the affairs concerning the incorporation

(328).The district council is divided into a regular district council and a temporary district council. The regular district council shall convene a supervisor who is the representative of a local council in December or January of each year, and the temporary district council shall, upon the request of at least 1/3 of its members, convene a meeting by the supervisor as well as at the request of the supervisor.

(324) Article 29 (1) and (2) (b).

Plaintiff

On February 6, 2012, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which requested the convening of a district council on the defendant of a church, accepted the land and buildings of the plaintiff church in relation to the "F development project".

Plaintiff

On June 3, 2013, the church requested G, a representative of the defendant, to hold a district council for the relocation of the temporary accommodation of the plaintiff church, with a list of 65 members of the district council attached, but G did not comply with this.

On July 1, 2013, the A Religious Organization Maintenance Foundation approved the transfer of the temporary accommodation of the Plaintiff church under the "Conditions under which the Maintenance Foundation is not responsible for the relocation expenses."

Plaintiff

On August 2, 2013, the church moves to the above G on the temporary worship.