1. On February 12, 2015, the Defendant’s order to close down the YYA against the Plaintiff shall be revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff is a clan that is composed of descendants, who is the first group of BC, the second group of BC, and the second group of C.

B. On November 24, 1996, the Plaintiff passed a resolution to store and urn the remains of a species-style ancestor scattered in various places, and installed an enshrinement facility (hereinafter “instant charnel facility”) on the ground of Chuncheon-si D (hereinafter “instant land”) around March 1997.

C. On February 12, 2015, the Defendant issued an order to close down a charnel hall (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that the instant charnel facility was installed without reporting the establishment thereof, and the relevant charnel hall violated the installation standards.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry of Gap evidence No. 1 (including provisional number), and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant charnel facility is a facility in the form of a tower in which the remains are installed, not a charnel room, but a charnel tower. Around March 1997 where the instant facility is installed, there was no legislation regulating the charnel tower, and Article 7 of the Addenda to the Act on Funeral Services, Etc. (amended by Jan. 28, 2015) provides that when an administrative disposition is taken against acts prior to the enforcement of this Act, the previous provision provides that the establishment of the charnel tower shall be in accordance with the previous provision, and there was no legal basis or standard for establishing the charnel tower. Therefore, since there was no administrative law regulating the instant charnel facility, which is the charnel tower, the instant disposition of this case is unlawful. 2) Even if the installation of charnel facility is applied under the current law to the instant facility, the instant disposition of this case is unlawful by abusing discretion.

B. It is as stated in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

C. 1) Article 2 subparag. 9 of the Act on Funeral Services, etc., which constitutes a charnel tower, is a fact that the charnel house of this case is inurning remains, and Article 2(1)2 of the Building Act regarding charnel houses (B).

Section B. -.