The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Shincheonji Church in a case in which members of the Shincheonji Church of Jesus claim compensation for damages, saying that they had suffered damage from so-called 'scheme evangelism' that teaches doctrine while hiding their affiliation with the Shincheonji Church of Jesus.



The 2nd division of the Supreme Court (Chief Justice Jo Jae-yeon) returned the case to the Daejeon District Court today (11th), breaking the original ruling that the plaintiff won some of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit for damages filed by three members of the Shincheonji local church and members.



The plaintiffs claimed that the members of the Shincheonji Church approached and learned the doctrine without revealing their affiliation, and as a result, they lost their free will and acted for a long time, claiming damages from the local church and members.



In the first instance, the claim of A among the plaintiffs was accepted, and in the second instance, the claim of the plaintiff B was partially accepted and awarded a compensation of 5 million won each.



The second trial judged that it was an illegal act to deceive many members of the church as if they belonged to another church through systematic and planned missionary work, and to use the close relationship formed in the process to make it difficult to stop education.



Two plaintiffs and some of the defendants who lost in the second trial appealed to the Supreme Court, dissatisfied with the judgment.



First of all, the Supreme Court ruled that "illegal acts may be established when the missionary act goes beyond the norm, loses social significance in its purpose and method, and loses the other party's freedom to choose religion."



It is the first to stipulate that missionary conduct can also result in civil tort liability under certain conditions.



The Supreme Court presented a criterion for judging whether the missionary purpose, method, and means should be considered in order to determine whether it has lost its social significance.



He pointed out that various circumstances such as the age, educational background, and religious life of the person concerned should be considered in detail as to whether the person has lost the right to self-determination.



The Supreme Court judged that in this case, it is difficult to hold the Shincheonji Church or its members responsible for their illegal acts in this case.



The court acknowledged that "the act of the defendants deceiving Plaintiff B as a member of a denomination other than Shincheonji is an act deserving of social and ethical condemnation."



However, he pointed out, "While receiving education, B did not stop the education even after he was fully aware that the defendants belonged to Shincheonji, and there was no coercive element in the process."



He also pointed out that Mr. B did not suffer any financial disadvantages and did not cause any problems in his daily life.



The Supreme Court decided that it was difficult to recognize the ability of the Shincheonji local church to be a party to the lawsuit.



An official of the Supreme Court explained, "Currently, three lawsuits filed by other members of the resignation are pending in the lower courts.



(Photo = Yonhap News)