1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the second part of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows.

Based on the fact that C sells the project site to F in around 2006 and F paid KRW 144,400,00 at actual expenses to C in order to implement the project, C has already renounced its project as its principal agent in around 2006, and it is still legitimate for C to develop the natural burial ground in this case as the principal agent of the Plaintiff who is a religious organization is not the Plaintiff’s agent qualification, and accordingly, C and F were jointly the Plaintiff to become the principal agent of the natural burial ground in this case. Accordingly, C and F had filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the establishment of the natural burial ground foundation related to the natural burial ground in 2010, and became final and conclusive after losing the Plaintiff’s claim that D, the representative of the Plaintiff’s natural burial ground in this case, was stated as husband of the above F, and the Plaintiff’s previous natural burial ground in this case’s previous project site for the purpose of selling it to C and the Plaintiff’s previous project site for the same religious organization (the Plaintiff’s previous project site for the natural burial ground in this case’s land).