1. The Defendant’s disposition of non-permission of construction against the Plaintiff on March 27, 2014 is revoked.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 5, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for a building permit (hereinafter “instant application”) with the Defendant to construct a funeral hall with the second floor above ground, the building area of 369.5 square meters, and the total floor area of 715.22 square meters (hereinafter “instant funeral hall”).

B. On March 27, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition of denying the instant application for the following reasons (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

(1) A group civil petition that objects to a funeral home shall be accepted three times (written petition, 115).

(2) The location of C or D is located in the vicinity, and it does not conform to the regional sentiments.

(3) It is anticipated that property damage will be caused by a decline in the aggregate value by taking occupancy in the residential area around the planned site for the construction of a funeral hall.

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the petition and filed a petition for an administrative appeals commission for the revocation of the instant disposition, but the said administrative appeals commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s petition on May 28, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 3 (including Serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s petition filed by nearby residents is not a ground for denying the application for permission of a funeral hall, and in light of the distance between C and D and the land of this case, it cannot be deemed that the functions of C and D are impeded by deeming the funeral hall to have been entered in the instant land, and the funeral hall is not a suspected facility. Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful inasmuch as the instant disposition does not constitute a justifiable ground for non-permission. 2) The Defendant’s assertion that the instant land was located within 50 meters from the place of residence and adjacent to the place of residence.