1. The plaintiff's appeal and the defendant's appeal are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of this court’s judgment citing the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following dismissal or addition. Thus, it is citing it as it is by the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. The main part - In the third part of the judgment of the first instance, “G” and “G” in the fourth part of the judgment of the first instance shall be raised to “H” respectively.

- In the third and nine instances of the first instance judgment, the term "this Court" shall be read as "court of the first instance".

3. The addition;

A. While the defendant has reached the trial for the first time, the third grave is set up on account of its change, the fourth grave is set up for a long time, and the right to grave base is acknowledged, the defendant asserts as follows, maintaining his argument in the first instance court that the right to grave base should be acknowledged:

- H (the principal of the fourth grave) died first than the F (the husband of the third grave) who is the husband.

- In such a case, it is no matter what the F installed H’s grave, i.e., on the side of the first and second graves in which the F is already installed (at the seat of his own grave), at all times.

- The third grave has been moved to the next direction than the first, second, and fourth grave, but the fourth grave was in the present location from the beginning.

- Nevertheless, the first instance judgment rejected Defendant’s assertion on the ground that it is difficult to easily understand that a grave was installed before the third grave was removed (the first instance judgment misleads the principal of the grave as G).

B. However, even if examining the photographs of No. 3, No. 4, and No. 6 (including each number), it is difficult to confirm the fact that No. 4 had been installed in the present location before the third grave was moved to the present location (as a result of the Defendant’s assertion, around 2016).

In addition, if the defendant's assertion is the defendant, why F's funeral is not installed immediately next to H's funeral which has already been installed.