1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that newly constructs and sells I apartment units on the site of Jeonnam-gun, Jeonnam-gun, H, etc.

B. There are approximately 225 graves in the above apartment project site. Within the project site, Defendant B’s father network J, C’s mother network K, Defendant E’s father network L’s father network L, and Defendant E’s mother network L. N has the above apartment project site, and there are those graves in Defendant D’s father network P, her mother network P, and her father Q Q.

C. On February 10, 2017, R R R’s field manager S entered into a grave relocation contract with the Plaintiff, without the consent of the said Defendants, transferred the remains in his/her body to the U.S. co-ownership cemetery in T, i.e., the body of his/her body mobilized the remains in his/her body, i.e., the body of the said Defendants.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 22 and 23, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. On February 10, 2017, the summary of the cause of the claim: (a) delegated R to R for a smooth promotion of the I Apartment Construction Project; and (b) required to preferentially remove those graves which completed consultation among those installed on the said apartment project site; (c) the R representativeV also removed those graves which the Defendants were the right holder; and (d) there was a legal dispute as to the existence or absence of the right to grave base against the said graves on the wind of their removal.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, as the actual owner or possessor of the land stated in the purport of the claim, seeks confirmation as to the absence of each right to grave base on 5 square meters within the land indicated in the purport of the claim in order to file a legal complaint regarding the existence or absence of the right to grave base

B. In a lawsuit for confirmation of confirmation, there must be a benefit of confirmation as a requirement for protection of rights, and the benefit of confirmation is one of the most effective means to eliminate the anxiety risk when there is a dispute between the parties as to the legal relationship subject to confirmation and due to the dispute between the parties, and there is apprehension or risk of the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status.