logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 영덕지원 2017.01.12 2016가합1023
공동의회 결의 등 무효확인 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff A, B, and C shall be dismissed.

2. The claims of plaintiffs D, E, F, G, H, I, and J are dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 12, 2013, the Korea Religious OrganizationO (hereinafter “former Association”) filed an application for membership with the Defendant Lo’s Association, and on May 26, 2013, a resolution was passed to hold a joint meeting to see the No’s History as a delegated pastor (hereinafter “resolution”).

B. On July 11, 2013, the Defendant Lo’s association held a temporary association to approve the membership of the Defendant Lo’s association, and passed a resolution of approval on the agenda that the former OO’s association shall hold as a delegated pastor (hereinafter “instant resolution”).

C. On April 12, 2015, the Gu Association held a joint council on April 12, 2015 and decided to merge between the Gu Association and the K Religious Organization M&D, but the name of the merged church as “K Religious Organization M&D.”

On April 12, 2015, the above combined church was a defendant Magaz, and at the time of the above joint council, a resolution was adopted to authorize Nwitz to go to the defendant Magaz. (hereinafter “instant resolution”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 11 evidence, Eul 5 and 8 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion in this case ①, ③ there is no room for holding the resolution, and each joint meeting record (Evidence A3 and 5) related to the above resolution is forged.

Therefore, the instant resolution ① and ③ is null and void, and the instant resolution is also null and void.

Accordingly, N is seeking confirmation that it is not in the status of the representative of the defendant MM church.

3. In a lawsuit for confirmation of the legitimacy of the Plaintiff A, B, and C’s lawsuit, the benefit of confirmation is required as a requirement for the protection of rights. The benefit of confirmation is recognized in cases where there is dispute between the parties as to the legal relationship subject to the lawsuit and where the Plaintiff’s right or legal status is unstable, thereby obtaining a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate such unstable risk.

arrow