1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. On April 19, 2018, the Defendant’s disciplinary action against the Plaintiff was taken.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an armed riot of the Defendant’s branch church B religious organization C. (hereinafter “C.C.”) and D is a person who was enrolled in C. C.C. on August 21, 201.

B. On July 6, 2016, the Plaintiff and the C church, an administrative secretary of the E and F (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs, etc.”) filed a complaint with the Defendant’s Ha local council trial committee on the grounds that D had committed various offenses, such as embezzlement of public funds by the head of the Ministry of Finance and Economy, and fabrication of church documents, on the grounds that D had been committed by committing an unlawful act, on the following grounds: (a) neglected to manage the church construction promotion committee by arbitrarily excluding the church from the church and the administrative secretary; (b) voluntarily operating the church without undergoing lawful procedures in the course of constructing the church church sex; and (c) improperly managing the church by increasing the construction cost without undergoing legitimate procedures; and (d) filed a complaint with D on July 6, 2016 on the ground that D had committed various offenses, such as forging church documents.

C. On September 23, 2016, the Defendant’s H Central Local Council trial committee rendered a decision that D was subject to suspension from office one year and six months, and the Plaintiff, etc. and D appealed against the above judgment and appealed to the Defendant’s general assembly trial committee.

On February 17, 2017, the Defendant’s general assembly trial committee cannot be concluded to have intentionally impaired the embezzlement of G. However, the Defendant judged that D was guilty only because it caused procedural problems due to inappropriate performance of duties, and applied D to the five-month period during which it was committed, while the Plaintiff et al. decided that D was free on part of the facts of the complaint, and sentenced D to each of the five-month period during which it was committed (hereinafter “first disciplinary action”).

After the first disciplinary action, the Plaintiff et al. filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking confirmation of the invalidation of the first disciplinary action as Seoul Central District Court 2017Gahap1510 on March 31, 2017, and a judgment on retirement on April 30, 2018, and both the Plaintiff et al. filed an appeal and a final appeal.