Gwacheon, Gyeonggi, won on appeal in its administrative suit against the Shincheonji Church of Jesus, the Temple of the Tabernacle of the Testimony (Shincheonji), which sought to use the ninth floor of an E-MART building as a religious facility. Although Shincheonji won at first instance, the appeals court ruled that Gwacheon's refusal to approve the change of use was lawful, citing traffic and evacuation and safety concerns.
The Suwon High Court Administrative Division 2 (presiding judge Lee Je-jeong) on the 12th overturned the first ruling and dismissed Shincheonji's claim in the appeal of its suit to cancel Gwacheon's refusal of its "application to change entries in the building ledger." The court also ordered Shincheonji to bear the litigation costs.
The suit began when Shincheonji sought to change the cultural and assembly facility on the ninth floor of the E-MART building in Byeolyang-dong, Gwacheon, into a religious facility. In March 2023, Shincheonji applied to Gwacheon to change the use of the facility from "cultural and assembly facility" to "religious facility (church)."
Gwacheon determined that if the use were changed, large numbers of people gathering at once could cause traffic congestion and raise evacuation and safety issues. Citing the impact on the living environment of nearby residents and students and potential community conflicts, the city rejected the application.
Shincheonji then filed an administrative suit seeking to overturn Gwacheon's disposition. The first court sided with Shincheonji. It found there was insufficient concrete basis to conclude Shincheonji's religious activities would harm the public interest, and that negative sentiment toward religious activities or mere majority opposition through complaints did not suffice to recognize an overriding public interest need to deny the change of use.
Gwacheon appealed the first ruling. In the appeal, to support projected traffic impacts and evacuation and safety issues if the use were changed to a religious facility, the city commissioned studies from expert institutions and submitted related materials to the court. It also stressed that the refusal was not a mere administrative judgment but a public-interest disposition to protect citizen safety and the surrounding living environment.
The appeals court sided with Gwacheon. It determined the application was not a mere change to entries in the building ledger but in effect an approval for a change of use.
The court said, "In light of the purpose of the amended law, this effectively falls under approval for a change of use," and added, "Because Gwacheon may refuse approval when there would be significant public-interest harm related to a change of use, the first ruling is deemed unlawful."