Whether the cost disbursed as the facility cost of a forest to create a private cemetery is the necessary or beneficial cost for the forest.

In order to use a forest as a private cemetery, expenses for facilities such as piling a stone embankment and planting and planting trees shall not be the expenses necessary for the forest owner to preserve the forest, and the expenses for the forest owner without permission for the installation of a private cemetery shall not be the beneficial expenses increased by the value of the forest.

Article 203 of the Civil Act

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1

Newcheon Park, a foundation, Attorneys Kim Dong-dong, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 76Na3069 delivered on February 2, 1978

The appeal shall be dismissed. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The judgment below rejected the Defendant’s right of retention from the Nonparty on the ground that the Defendant had donated the instant forest to the Nonparty, while managing a private cemetery installation project with the permission of 52,297 square meters for the installation of the private park on the instant forest, and collected cemetery usage fees, grave management expenses, etc. from the establisher of the instant grave. The Defendant constructed the instant forest in stairs around April 1972 for the purpose of using the instant forest as a private cemetery, 580 meters in total within the instant forest, 4 meters in width, and 6 meters in width, and 10 meters in height of the forest and 10 meters in total, and 6 meters in height of the forest and 15 meters in width, as well as in the cost of installing the private cemetery for the instant forest and 1,200 square meters in total, and 6 meters in height of the forest and 1,000 adjacent forest and 1,000 square meters in total, and 60 meters in height of the forest and 1,000 square meters in total.

2. We affirm the above decision of the court below in light of the records, since various facilities in the judgment above are needed for the private park cemetery projects in the defendant's management, and it cannot be deemed necessary for the maintenance and preservation of the forest as seen above, and there is no evidence to view that the objective value of the forest as seen above has increased due to the above facilities, and therefore, we cannot accept the above decision of the court below in light of the legal principles as to the incomplete deliberation or the beneficial cost, such as the theory of lawsuit, or the lack of reasoning.

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and the costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Jeong Tae-won (Presiding Justice)