1.(a)

The part of the first instance judgment requesting the delivery of remains shall be revoked.

B. The defendant shall enter the attached list in the plaintiff.

1. The reasoning behind this court’s reasoning is as follows: (a) the pertinent part of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the deletion of “the consent of other descendants” of the third and fourth of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) such part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 4

2. The part requesting the delivery of remains

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion of the right as the deceased decedent (1) did not agree with the Plaintiff and the Defendant et al.’s descendants on the burial ground for the remains of this case, and even if so agreed, there was an agreement.

The plaintiff asserts that, as a deceased master, the location of the remains of this case may be changed according to the right to manage and dispose of the remains of this case.

The defendant asserts that, according to the agreement with the plaintiff, the F descendants decided the burial ground of the remains of this case by majority, and even if the descendants did not reach an agreement, the plaintiff can not unilaterally request the delivery of the remains of this case (in particular, Nos. 1 through 4 of the annexed sheet) even if the descendants did not reach an agreement.

(2) (A) Article 1008-3 of the Civil Act of the relevant legal principles provides that the presiding official of a company shall succeed to the ownership of the forest land within 1 information belonging to a grave and the farmland within 600 square meters and the farmland within a grave, stowing and memorials, and the ownership of stowing and memorials. The above provision is a mandatory provision established for the purpose of preserving our tradition of ancestor worship and memorial services, preventing the dispersion of the property for use, preventing the dispersion of the property for use, and clarifying the legal relationship as to the succession to the property for use.

In addition, a human remains is a remains that can be the object of burial management and removal, and a remains remains a grave that is installed in a grave, along with a grave that is a property for use, as stipulated in Article 1008-3 of the Civil Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2007Da27670, Nov. 20, 2008). (B) In this case, a decedent is succeeded to the grave.