1. The Defendant’s disposition of non-construction permit (new construction) against the Plaintiff on May 31, 2018 is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 19, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for permission for development, application for permission for mountainous district conversion, and report on installation of drainage facilities, etc., by means of complex civil petitions, in order to newly build graveyard-related facilities of the building area of 237.4 square meters and of the second floor above ground (hereinafter “animal-related facilities”) on the ground of 4,500 square meters of B forest land in Busan-gun, Busan-gun (hereinafter “instant site”).

B. The Defendant presented a review on the application for building permission to the plane captain-gun Urban Planning Committee. On May 30, 2018, the plane captain-gun Urban Planning Committee rejected the deliberation on the application for building permission on the ground that “the location of graveyard-related facilities, such as damage to surrounding landscape and forests caused by development activities, and location of sports facilities used by many neighboring people,”

C. Accordingly, on May 31, 2018, the Defendant rendered a new construction permit (new construction) disposition on the same ground as the deliberation by the captain-gun Urban Planning Committee.

(hereinafter "Disposition in this case"). / [Grounds for recognition] The entry in Gap evidence 1, 2, and Eul evidence 1 (which include each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s instant application does not contravene the relevant statutes, nor is there a concern over damaging surrounding landscape and forest due to development activities, and the instant land is likely to be exposed to sports facility users, and thus, it is difficult to view the instant application as inappropriate for the location of graveyard-related facilities.

In addition, the instant disposition is excessively limited to the Plaintiff’s exercise of property right, although there is no need for significant public interest.

Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful as it misleads the fact about the grounds for disposition or deviatess from or abused discretionary power.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

(c).