1. The Defendant’s “ September 6, 2016” recorded in the instant complaint on September 1, 2016 is deemed to be in light of the evidence No. 3.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 27, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a report on the establishment of a religious organization’s sealing hall with a 415.8 square meters in the 415 square meters of the storage room of a religious facility (building) located in the 1086 and two lots of land in Seongbuk-dong, Chungcheongnam-dong, Chungcheongnam-dong, Chungcheongnam-do, (hereinafter “instant sealing hall”) with the Defendant on the establishment of a 415.8 square meters of the wing-do warehouse of the Dong-dong (hereinafter “instant charnel hall”).

B. On September 1, 2016, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s report on the establishment of a religious organization charnel on the ground that “the Plaintiff did not comply with the commitment with the residents who want not to absolutely maintain a charnel at the time of permitting the construction of the temple, and there were various living environments and opposing civil petitions by residents.”

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). 【The ground for recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 4 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 of this case is unlawful by abusing and abusing discretion for the following reasons.

① The report on the installation of the instant charnel is in compliance with the standards for the establishment of the relevant statutes. ② The report on the installation of the instant villa does not require significant public interest to refuse to accept the report on the installation of the instant villa, and there is only 21 residents of the nearby 11 household who demand monetary compensation. ③ The installation of the instant charnel hall at the 500 period to be installed in the instant villa corresponds to the basic direction of funeral administration. ④ The site for the installation of the instant villa is not a general residential area or a residential area, but a religious facility, and is not exposed to the outside. ⑤ The instant disposition that rejected the Plaintiff’s building permit on the premise of the installation of the instant villa is also in violation of the principle of trust protection, and the instant disposition violates the principle of equity with the Defendant’s acceptance of the report on the installation of the instant charnel hall, such as the death and death of the Defendant, and 7) where the instant charnel hall is installed on the acceptance of the report on the installation of the instant charnel hall.