1. The Defendant’s refusal to accept the report on the development of family natural burial grounds against the Plaintiff on August 3, 2018 shall be revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 16, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a report on the development of family natural burial ground (hereinafter “instant report”) with respect to the portion of 11m2,00 square meters in which the Plaintiff’s grave was installed among the 44,667m2 (hereinafter “instant forest”).

B. On August 3, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition against the Plaintiff refusing to accept the instant report for the following reasons.

(1) The forest of this case is an area where a large-scale illegal burial ground has been established and created by an unspecified number of unspecified persons without obtaining permission for graveyard and permission for establishment of a corporation from 1994 (hereinafter “instant disposition”). The forest of this case is an area where the Defendant issued an administrative disposition regarding the prohibition of the use of the entire cemetery facilities ( July 2010) and the closure of an illegal graveyard facility ( September 2010) under the Act on Funeral Services, Etc.

If the report of this case is accepted, the validity of the above administrative disposition by the defendant (hereinafter referred to as "reasons 1") shall be lost (hereinafter referred to as "the defendant has consistently announced that there is no legal basis for the request and question of the relative of the illegal cemetery, and regarding the telephone civil petition, there is no legal basis for the compatibility of the large-scale illegal cemetery with respect to the request and question of the relative of the illegal cemetery, and that the majority among the related persons of the illegal grave has already completed the reburial of the illegal grave or planned to open the grave.

(3) A dispute (litigation and accusation) has been raised between a person who has installed or created an illegal grave on the instant forest and a person having a grave, and the defendant and the person having a grave have been also under dispute over the violation of the Funeral Services, etc. Act.

(4) If the report of this case is accepted, it is likely that it would result in creating a large-scale illegal cemetery in the future (hereinafter “reasons 4”). 【No dispute exists, and evidence Nos. 1 and 2 are numbers.