法務省：https:// Www.moj.go.jp/conten T/001144527.pdf

In 20XX, a large amount of new natural gas resource Y was discovered in A City, which could replace oil and coal. However, the extraction of Y posed health risks to workers and nearby residents due to the presence of harmful substances. Despite this, A City decided to approve the extraction plan, and a new department, the Y Countermeasures Section, was established to ensure safety and gain public trust.

Two university students, B and C, who had publicly expressed their opinions on the extraction of Y, applied for jobs at the Y Countermeasures Section. B believed that safety measures were necessary, while C was absolutely opposed to the extraction. Although they were initially hired, they were not formally employed after a six-month probationary period due to their past statements and actions.

B considered this decision to be discriminatory and believed that his freedom of expression had been violated. He planned to file a lawsuit against A City, arguing that the city's decision was unconstitutional.

In a separate case, a company, X, had been granted permission to operate a fuel oil handling facility in Y City. However, the construction of a funeral home nearby raised concerns about safety and potential conflicts with the facility. The city's fire department stated that the funeral home would require a certain distance from the facility to ensure safety, but this distance could be shortened if certain conditions were met.

The city had established internal guidelines for shortening the distance, which took into account factors such as the type of facility, the quantity and type of hazardous materials handled, and the height and fire resistance of the facilities. Based on these guidelines, the city planned to order X to relocate its facility to a safer location.