[과태료추징금부과처분취소][집26(3)행,140;공1979.3.15.(604),11620]
Whether an administrative fine may be imposed on a lessor for illegal use of water supply by a lessee
According to the purport of Article 128 (2) of the Local Autonomy Act and Article 41 (1) and (2) of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Water Supply Ordinance, it is evident that excessive rent is imposed only on an illegal act or a person who stolen water supply by fraud or other improper means. Therefore, it is not true that the illegal act was involved or the same was committed, and it is not possible for the lessor who does not have any special relationship as provided in Article 9 of the above Water Supply Ordinance to take the excessive charge.
Article 128 (2) of the Local Autonomy Act, Articles 41 (1), 41 (2), and 9 of the Seoul Metropolitan Government Water Supply Ordinance
Plaintiff
Attorney Kim Jong-young, Counsel for the defendant-appellant
Seoul High Court Decision 77Gu415 delivered on July 25, 1978
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.
Judgment on the grounds of appeal by Defendant’s Attorney;
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, Article 128 (2) of the Local Autonomy Act provides that a person who is exempted from the collection of fees, fees, and contributions by fraud or other improper means may be punished by a fine for negligence not exceeding five times the amount exempted from such collection. Article 41 (1) of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Water Supply Ordinance provides that a person who is exempted from the collection of fees by fraud or other improper means may be punished by a fine for negligence not exceeding five times the amount exempted from such collection. Article 41 (2) of the same Act provides that a person who uses water supply by fraud or other improper means can be punished by a fine for negligence not exceeding five thousand won against a person who uses water supply by fraud or other improper means. According to the purport of the above provision, since it is evident that a person who actually committed an unlawful act in this case shall be punished by a fine for negligence not exceeding nine times the amount of a fine for negligence on the ground that the person who is the non-party's family member, was not liable for such unlawful act, the court below's determination that the above provision of the fine for negligence is justified.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed as without merit. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Han-jin (Presiding Justice)