1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 20, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for establishment permission of “C, an incorporated foundation,” on the ground that the purpose of establishment is to realize cultural welfare through the promotion of local culture and arts and the creation and distribution of culture and arts.

B. On April 19, 2017, the Defendant recommended the Plaintiff to re-application for re-application by changing the name of the corporation on the ground that it is not appropriate to use the name of the corporation because it is likely to mislead the Plaintiff as a corporation established by any local government (D).

C. On April 26, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the establishment permission of the “Foundation E” (hereinafter “instant foundation”) at the same location for the same purpose of establishment.

On April 27, 2017, the Defendant inquired the D Mayor, etc. about whether the same name as the name of the Foundation of this case is being used, and the D Mayor sent the following replies to the Defendant on April 28, 2017.

I reply to the same name as the result of the inquiry regarding the establishment permission.

However, since the purpose of the establishment of the Foundation is "the realization of cultural welfare through the promotion of local culture and arts" and the creation and dissemination of culture and arts, the name of the Foundation is likely to be mistaken for that of "D City", which is the name of the local government, so D/C presents an opposing opinion on the use of the name "E".

E. On May 1, 2017, the Defendant rejected the establishment of the instant foundation foundation on the following grounds.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). Based on Article 19 of the Local Culture Promotion Act, Article 4 of the Act on the Operation of Local Government-Invested and Invested Institutions, Article 4-2 of the Local Cultural Institutes Promotion Act, and Article 3(5) of the established rules concerning the criteria for judgment under the same subparagraph, the E Act is likely to mislead any person into being a corporation established by a local government (D), and the use of the name of the corporation is not appropriate because it is anticipated that the occurrence of damage for public

F. Meanwhile, on the other hand.