1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. On July 15, 2014, the Defendant issued an order to relocate a private cemetery to the Plaintiff.

Basic Facts

On June 12, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with B and two other parties to purchase part of the C forest land jointly owned by them. On August 25, 2013, the Plaintiff buried the deceased D’s remains, the husband of which was the husband, and installed a private cemetery (hereinafter “instant grave”).

(4) On July 15, 2014, the Defendant issued an order to move the instant grave to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition order”) by no later than November 21, 2014, in violation of Article 31 Subparag. 1 and Article 14(6) of the Act on Funeral Services, Etc. (amended by Act No. 13108, Jan. 28, 2015; hereinafter “former Funeral Act”); Article 15 [Attachment 2] of the former Enforcement Decree of the Funeral Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26418, Jul. 20, 2015; hereinafter the same) on the ground that the instant grave was installed within 300 meters from E (hereinafter “instant road”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, the purport of the plaintiff's argument, and the non-existence of grounds for disposition of the plaintiff's argument on the road of this case is located within 300 meters of the road of this case. However, in light of land and topographical conditions, the function of the road of this case does not interfere with the use of the road of this case, and the above road does not appear on the road of this case, and the disposition of this case on the ground that the grave of this case did not meet the above installation standards (hereinafter "establishment standards of this case") is unlawful.

Although there are many graves located within 300 meters from the road in addition to the instant grave, the Defendant abused discretion, and did not take any administrative measures against the said graves, and the installation of the instant grave.