The case shall be remanded to the Daegu High Court.

1. On January 9, 1989, the lower court accepted the Plaintiff’s claim seeking revocation of the disposition on the grounds that the Defendant’s disposition on the suspension of the business of the petroleum selling business (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff was unlawful.

In other words, according to Article 13 (3) of the Petroleum Business Act, the authority of the Minister of Energy to suspend the business of petroleum selling business is limited to the Minister of Construction and Transportation, and according to Article 23 (1) of the same Act and Article 25 (1) 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act and Article 25 (1) 2 of the same Act of the same Act, the authority of the Minister of Construction and Transportation to suspend the business of the Minister of Construction and Transportation is delegated to the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Metropolitan City, or Do Governor. Thus, the person having the right to suspend the business of this case is the Gyeongbuk-do Governor, and the defendant does not have the authority to order the suspension of the petroleum selling business in his own name,

2. However, according to Article 4 of the Regulations on Delegation and Entrustment of Administrative Authority, an administrative agency may delegate part of its affairs to its subsidiary organs or subordinate administrative agencies, or entrust or delegate it to other administrative agencies, local governments or subordinate administrative agencies. In this case, an agency delegated or entrusted with part of the affairs so delegated or entrusted may re-entrust it to its subsidiary organs or subordinate administrative agencies, as determined by law, and Article 5 (1) of the Government Organization Act and Article 5 (1) of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor, Metropolitan City Mayor, or Do governor (including the Superintendent of City/Do Office of Education to be Seoul and Do Office of Education) may delegate part of the delegated affairs to the head of the Gu, Si, Gun (including the head of the Education Office and the head of the District Office of Education) and the head of the Gun (including the head of the District Office of Education and the head of the District Office of Education and the head of the agency affiliated therewith) with the approval of the delegated head of the agency, if necessary for improvement of administrative efficiency and convenience of residents.

3. Nevertheless, according to the Enforcement Decree of the Petroleum Business Act and the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the court below determined that the authority of the business suspension for petroleum retail business was delegated only to the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Metropolitan City or Do Governor, but not until the head of the Gun, and held that the Gyeongbuk-do Governor again delegated the authority of the business suspension for the head of the Gun under the conditions as prescribed by the Rules with the approval of the Minister of Power and Resources, and held that the business suspension for the head of the Gun was illegal since the Defendant was conducted by an administrative agency without the authority of the business suspension for the head of the Gun. Thus, the court below did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the re-election of the administrative authority, and it is obvious that such illegality affected the conclusion of the judgment. Accordingly, there

4. Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Jae-sung (Presiding Justice)