beta
Text
1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.
On November 28, 2012, the Defendant is a public cemetery against the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On October 14, 1995, the Plaintiff, a resident of Ansan-si, reported to the Defendant a burial under the Funeral Services Act (hereinafter “Act”) in order to hold a funeral. On or around the 16th day of the same month, the Defendant, based on the Ordinance on the Establishment and Operation of Ansan-si and the Ordinance on the Establishment and Operation of Ansan-si Cemetery (Enforcement January 17, 1995) (hereinafter “the instant public cemetery”), filed a permit to use a public cemetery with the Plaintiff for a period of 15 years (from October 16, 1995 to October 15, 201).
(hereinafter “the first permission”). Around that time, the Plaintiff paid KRW 60,000 for the usage fee and management fee prescribed in the above Ordinance, and installed a Chomo B’s grave within the public cemetery of this case.
B. The Plaintiff did not file an application for extension of the period of use of a park cemetery with the Defendant even after the said period of use expired. However, around October 25, 2012, the Plaintiff sent a notice stating that if the Defendant wishes to extend the period of use of the park cemetery to the Plaintiff, he/she shall apply for extension, and that he/she shall pay the fees and maintenance fees calculated by dividing it into “in the city” and “out the city” pursuant to attached Table 2 of Article 8(1) of the Ordinance on the Establishment and Operation of Funeral Facilities in Ansan-si (Enforcement of August 8, 2012; hereinafter “instant Ordinance”). On November 28, 2012, the Plaintiff issued an application for extension of the period of use of the park cemetery to the Defendant and obtained permission for extension for up to 15 years from October 16, 2010 to October 15, 2025 (hereinafter “instant permission”), and imposed both the Plaintiff’s address and the Defendant’s management fees (hereinafter “in addition to the Plaintiff’s address”).
C. After that, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Defendant on the imposition of the above fee and management fee, but was dismissed on March 23, 2013, and the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission on June 18, 2013.