내수면어업신고 수리 불가 처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On June 2010, the Plaintiff filed a report on inland fisheries with the Defendant on the type and size of the facility as “1,320 square meters in plastic greenhouse (water size 700 square meters)”, “from June 21, 2010 to June 20, 2015,” “the term of validity from June 21, 2010 to June 20,” “B of Mine-gu (hereinafter “instant land”) where the facilities are located, “land farming” in the method of fisheries, “land farming” in the type of cultivated products, and “snick snick, snick snick, and snick” in the type of cultivated products. On June 21, 2010, the
The term "previous report on fisheries" refers to "previous report on fisheries," and "the aquaculture of this case established and operated by the plaintiff in accordance with the previous report on fisheries."
B. On May 7, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that it is impossible to file a re-report on inland fisheries with the following content:
The plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation with the Gwangju District Court 2016Guhap10480, but the above court rendered a dismissal judgment on January 11, 2018, and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
Notice of Failure to report inland fisheries again;
2. In relation to a report on inland fisheries under the Republic of Korea, the head of the State shall immediately suspend inland fisheries after the expiration of the period of validity and immediately suspend inland fisheries after the expiration of the period of validity ( June 20, 2015) because it violated the provisions on special measures for designation and management of development restriction zones and on prevention and control of illegal acts in development restriction zones.
3. In addition, inland fisheries reports shall be in conflict with Article 11 of the Inland Water Fisheries Act, Article 9 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, and other Acts and subordinate statutes concerning the restriction or prohibition of fishing activities, and shall be subject to the submission of a report on inland fisheries.
C. On April 12, 2018, the Plaintiff applied for extension of the term of validity of the previous fishery report to the Defendant, but the Defendant returned the said application on April 18, 2018 for the following reasons.
As to this, the plaintiff is revoked by the Gwangju District Court 2018Guhap1289.