Case Overview

This case arose from a long-running dispute concerning congregant status and governance rights following the integration of religious organizations. A religious foundation holding legal title to a religious organization's building filed claims against congregants seeking delivery of the building and restitution of unjust enrichment in the amount of approximately KRW 884.88 million.

While the plaintiff's claim for delivery of the building was granted at the first-instance court, One Law Partners, LLC comprehensively challenged the circumstances surrounding the integration of the religious organizations, the congregants' status, and the ownership, management, and use of the religious organization's property on appeal.

The case involved highly complex legal issues, including interpretation of the denomination's constitution, the legal effect of the integration of religious organizations, congregant status, and rights to use religious organization property. Given the existence of multiple related proceedings running in parallel, the matter required a comprehensive analysis of both the factual and legal relationships involved.


Key Issues

1. Whether the religious foundation, as the registered owner of the religious organization's building, could seek delivery of the building from the congregants;
2. Whether the congregants' status and rights as members of the religious organization remained recognized following the integration;
3. Whether the congregants possessed lawful authority to occupy and use the religious organization's building; and
4. Whether the congregants were liable for restitution of unjust enrichment and damages arising from their use of the building.

Litigation Strategy

Following the unfavorable first-instance judgment, One Law Partners, LLC thoroughly reexamined the existing litigation materials, related judgments, the denomination's constitution and implementing regulations, and materials prepared during the integration process from the ground up.

In particular, the firm focused on the distinction between legal title to the religious organization's building and the congregants' rights to use the property. By comprehensively analyzing the congregants' status, the legal nature of the religious organization's property, and the circumstances of actual possession and use, the firm identified and specifically challenged the shortcomings of the first-instance court's reasoning.

Throughout the proceedings, the parties engaged in intense disputes over both facts and legal principles. The attorneys meticulously reviewed extensive records and individual provisions of the denomination's constitution, while continuously refining their arguments and evidentiary support by comparing related judgments and supporting materials. Special emphasis was placed on establishing the legal relationships formed following the integration of the religious organizations and the factual circumstances supporting the congregants' legitimate rights of use, which were then developed into persuasive legal arguments for the appellate court.

The attorneys also personally participated in an on-site inspection, providing detailed explanations regarding the structure of the building, its actual use, and the congregants' worship and religious activities, thereby ensuring that facts observable at the site were fully reflected in the court's assessment.

In addition, the team went beyond written submissions by continuously presenting key legal arguments and evidence during oral proceedings. They systematically organized the complicated factual background, specifically rebutted the opposing party's assertions, and persistently advocated their position so that the court could accurately understand the substance of the dispute.


Result

The appellate court reversed the portions of the first-instance judgment that were unfavorable to the defendants and dismissed all of the plaintiff's claims for delivery of the building and monetary relief, granting a complete victory to the defendants.

Notably, the plaintiff sought not only approximately KRW 884.88 million and accrued delay damages, but also additional amounts equivalent to ongoing usage fees accruing until completion of delivery of the building. Had these claims been granted, the defendants would have been required to surrender the building and bear a substantial financial burden, including delay damages and future accruing amounts.

However, by securing a judgment rejecting all of the plaintiff's claims on appeal, One Law Partners, LLC eliminated the significant financial risks faced by the clients and secured the legal basis for them to continue using the building and carrying out their religious activities.


Significance of the Case

This judgment confirms that the mere fact that legal title to a religious organization building is held by a religious foundation does not automatically render the congregants' possession and use unlawful. Rather, the congregants' status as members of the religious organization and the actual nature of the property's use must also be taken into consideration.

In particular, this victory followed One Law Partners, LLC's earlier success in overturning a first-instance dismissal and securing a complete appellate victory in a related lawsuit seeking confirmation of the invalidity of a General Assembly Judicial Committee decision and confirmation of congregant status. In the present building possession action as well, the firm successfully reversed an unfavorable first-instance judgment and achieved a complete victory on appeal.

Both cases stemmed from a prolonged internal dispute within a religious organization in which factual and legal issues had become deeply intertwined, leading to intense litigation between the parties. Nevertheless, the attorneys achieved consecutive victories by persuading the courts through rigorous analysis of the denomination's constitution and applicable legal principles, comprehensive review of extensive evidentiary materials, verification of facts through on-site inspections, and persistent advocacy supported by thorough evidentiary submissions.

This outcome is particularly significant because, in a highly complex religious organization dispute, the firm protected both the clients' foundation for continued religious activity and their substantial property interests through meticulous legal analysis, proactive evidentiary investigation, and unwavering attention to every critical issue throughout the litigation.

-
Sun-Young Rhyu, Attorney | syrhyu@onelawpartners.com
Seo-Young Kang, Attorney | sykang@onelawpartners.com
Jong-Mun Park, Attorney | jmpark@onelawpartners.com
-
Public Relations Team, One Law Partners, LLC | pr@onelawpartners.com