In order to cope with the steady increase in social demand, the establishment of forest welfare facilities is being considered not only by the national or local governments but also in the private sector. However, just as there are varying types of facilities, there are varying regulations overseeing these facilities, as well as complex processes involving negotiations between related government agencies, designation, approvals for establishment plans, registration, and feasibility assessments. Forest welfare facilities are created through heavy investment, thus requiring a prudent approach. Therefore, this study has compared the procedures of forest welfare facilities, identified points of improvement in the planning procedures, and provided basic data on forest welfare facilities plans. This study has reviewed the existing literature relating to the concept of forest welfare facilities and site selection and identified related laws and regulations on which new establishments are based. Further, it has examined the procedure of establishment of forest welfare facilities specified in the relevant laws and regulations, finally arriving at implications that consider similarities in establishment procedures in forest welfare facilities. There have been ongoing studies to evaluate and determine appropriate sites for forest welfare facilities. In addition to common elements such as landscapes and natural (forest) environments, previous studies have suggested methods for selecting appropriate sites based on specific evaluation factors, according to the characteristics of individual facilities. Some research results have been legislated and are being utilized subsequently. In addition, in the case of woodland burial grounds, which are suffering from various civil complaints during the establishment process due to psychological rejection unlike other forest welfare facilities, this study found that there were no indications of procedures such as public hearings, feasibility assessments, and committee reviews.

Determined according to urban parks and green urban planning, urban planning facilities are established in accordance with the “National Land Planning and Utilization Act.” The designation of land use is accompanied by certain restrictions, and urban planning facilities are provided for cases that are based on the expropriation or use of land property rights, such as the result of enforcement. The property rights and time of certain individuals may even be sacrificed to ensure the enforcement of a project, but it is uncertain whether the Constitutional Court ruling on the Constitution was administrative or opportunistic with regard to the practice bar. This study is based on case studies, and consideration is given to working out a long-term solution to the problem of urban parks owned by local governments, and the budget reality. In terms of presenting evidence, 248 response measures will be provided among the as-yet non-constructed parks in the city of Daejeon, where a park is likely to lose its qualification analysis and assessment system to cope with the indicators elicited for the sake of prioritization. According to these new evaluation criteria, the priority order of long-term unexecuted urban parks in the city of Daejeon is as follows. Gayang Birae, Guam, Daesa, Sajeong, Hodong, and Hoedeok neighborhood park were evaluated in the order.