1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. As to this part of the basic facts, this Court’s explanation is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (as stated in Forms 9 through 5, 8, 1. Basic Facts) except for the following matters, and thus, this Court’s explanation is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Defendant B Hospital Head of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant B Hospital Head”) shall be the Seoul Special Metropolitan City B Hospital Director of the first instance judgment.

The judgment of the first instance court No. 10-11 of the 3rd judgment "Defendant Seoul Metropolitan Government" is "Defendant Seoul Metropolitan Government".

The “Defendant” refers to the “Defendant”. The head of the Defendant’s hospital in Category 4 under the attached table Nos. 15-16, 18, and 4 of the first instance court’s decision are as follows: “The Head of the Defendant Hospital” in the attached table No. 12 and 5. The Defendant Seoul Metropolitan Government is respectively as the “Defendant” in the attached table No. 4 of the first instance court’s decision. The Defendant Seoul Metropolitan Government is as the “Defendant” in the attached table No. 6, 9, and 16.

2. Notwithstanding the Plaintiff’s advance payment of KRW 711,11,00 for one-year usage fees of the instant funeral hall to the Defendant on April 13, 2012, the Plaintiff was unable to normally use the instant funeral hall from April 16, 2012 to September 27, 2013, as the Intervenor operating the instant funeral hall and D refused the transfer.

Therefore, in accordance with the instant terms and conditions, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff interest of KRW 20,623,763 calculated by applying 2% interest rate for advance payment of KRW 711,11,00 for the period from April 16, 2012 to September 27, 2013, and damages for delay.

3. With respect to this part of the judgment, the reasons why the court should explain are as follows, except for the addition of some contents and the addition of some contents, since it is identical to the entry from the last 8th to 20 pages of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act is applicable.