beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the instant disposition
A. The Plaintiff’s permission to establish a private cemetery against the Plaintiff was formulated a development plan for approximately 190,560 square meters for the purpose of creating a memorial park site, which is a private cemetery in around 1994 (hereinafter “instant cemetery”). On March 3, 1995, the Plaintiff obtained the permission to establish a private cemetery for the instant cemetery site on the following conditions (hereinafter “the instant permission conditions”).
- The project shall be carried out by obtaining forest damage permits only twice a year, and the area as originally planned by the change of the national land utilization - the length of the access road 675 meters and width of the access road 675 meters;
B. 1) The Plaintiff was equipped with an access road for the instant cemetery under Article 140 of the Rules on the Determination, Structure, and Installation Standards of Urban Planning Facilities according to the contents of the permission for the establishment of a private cemetery. As such, the Plaintiff obtained the permission for the establishment of an access road (g) around May 2003, and obtained the permission for the diversion of farmland, the permission for the alteration of the form and quality, and the permission for the diversion of a reserved forest around June 2003 and July of the same year, but neglected the construction of the access road and neglected the construction of the access road, and the period of each permission was expired on December 31, 2006. 2) Accordingly, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the above access road was revoked on April 26, 2007, and the permission for the diversion of the use of the above farmland was revoked on May 2, 2007, and on April 17, 2007, respectively.
3) At the present site of the burial site of this case, roads are forest roads (a forest roads). The planned site of the access road of this case is a valley and it is difficult to open a road under the topographical features. The Plaintiff has no plan to open the access road, and has the intent to use the forest road as the access road of the burial site of this case under the Defendant’s implied consent. (c) The Plaintiff’s delay and progress 1) due to lack of funds.