A. On December 29, 2010, each of the plaintiffs used the name "phishing" and "phishing 40 persons and 12 persons (the plaintiff used the name "phishing" at the time of application, but actually there is no dispute between the parties on the fact that the pertinent organization is "phishing"; hereinafter the plaintiffs applied for an inspection that is not subject to safety inspection by the head of an incorporated association designated and publicly notified as an institution entrusted with safety inspection of amusement facilities and machines pursuant to Article 80(3)4 of the former Tourism Promotion Act (amended by Act No. 1056, Apr. 5, 201; hereinafter the same shall apply) pursuant to Article 33(1) of the Tourism Promotion Act and Article 40 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act.

B. On January 14, 2011, the president of the Association refused all of the Plaintiffs’ applications on the grounds that the instant organization was not a machine subject to safety inspection (hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). On January 28, 2011, the Defendant excluded the Plaintiff from the institution entrusted with safety inspection of amusement facilities and machines, and accordingly, the affairs related to the instant disposition was reverted to the Defendant.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 6 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

(1) The instant apparatus constitutes a machine that is not subject to safety inspections prescribed by the Tourism Promotion Act, and does not constitute game products or speculative game products prescribed by the Game Industry Promotion Act (hereinafter “Game Industry Promotion Act”), or speculative gaming products prescribed by the former Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts (amended by Act No. 11034, Aug. 4, 201; hereinafter “Act on Regulation of Speculative Acts”).

(2) Before the instant disposition, the Association continued to inspect the instant organization and verify that it constitutes a machine that is not subject to safety inspections under the Tourism Promotion Act. The Plaintiffs invested enormous funds, such as purchasing the instant organization and leasing the place of business, by trusting the public opinion expressed by the Association. Since the Plaintiffs’ legitimate trust was infringed on the instant disposition, the instant disposition was unlawful in violation of the principle of trust protection.

(b) Related statutes;

Attached Form 2 is as shown in the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes.

C. Determination

(1) Whether the instant apparatus constitutes a machine that is not subject to safety inspections prescribed in the Tourism Promotion Act

(A) Article 40(1) [Attachment 11] [Attachment 1] 3(d) of the Enforcement Rule of the Tourism Promotion Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs No. 17, Feb. 17, 201; hereinafter the same shall apply) provides for an electronic game facility and machine not subject to safety inspection: (a) an auxiliary device is used within a certain facility (such as machine, apparatus, space) or a program included in a printed circuit board (PCB) or a computercom disc (copi) in which users can use or experience the screen; (b) an electronic game machine or machine, etc. can be used as one example; (c) an electronic game machine or machine for which a large number of users can use or experience from the screen; (d) an electronic game machine or machine is subject to safety inspection; (d) Article 40(1) [Attachment 11] 3(d) of the Enforcement Rule of the Tourism Promotion Act; (d) provides for an electronic game machine or machine subject to safety inspection; (d) partial amendment or deletion 17(1).

(B) Considering the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, 5, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 8, and the overall purport of the arguments as a result of the verification conducted by the Korean court, the instant organization is allowed to be used by anyone provided in [Attachment 11] Nos. 40(1) [Attachment 11] 3 subparag. 3(d) of the Enforcement Rule of the Tourism Promotion Act, and it is difficult to view it as an play-type recreation facility

1) Since the inclusion of subparagraph 3 (d) of [Attachment 9] of the former Enforcement Rule of the Tourism Promotion Act (amended by Ministerial Ordinance No. 136 of Apr. 14, 2006) (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs No. 85 of Feb. 17, 201), the machine was one of the play types among the amusement facilities and machines not subject to safety inspection until it is excluded from subparagraph 3 (d) of [Attachment 11] of the former Enforcement Rule of the Tourism Promotion Act (amended by Ordinance No. 85 of the Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs of Feb. 17, 201). Although the Enforcement Rule does not provide for the form and use method of the "Malaysia" as well, the machine widely known as the name of "Malaysia" at the time of its enforcement was a method of moving the horse if a user puts in a hole by digging the string, and it was a method of expressing the name of the user only in the form of the above screen.

2) From among the instant organizations, radar ages reported the virtual racing of horse through the screen and met the horse riding. It is similar to one of the game products of horse racing regulated by the Korean Racing Association Act, which is exampleed as one of the speculative game products in the Game Industry Promotion Act, users gather sprinks or figures without using their body, except for the entry of horse and board money in the selected form without standing. Other types of play machines are different from those of other types, users may exchange 10,000 won sprinks with a right to use, and users may use 10,000 won sprinks with a high amount of money playing function, such as 5,10,20 times, and 20 times, and it is difficult to view that users can easily use sprinks in light of the fact that the result determined by the game by the user’s machine volume, the result determined by the game by the points obtained by the game, and there is no possibility that users can use sprinks in the form of using the game without any possibility of using it.

3) Of the instant structure, reciling is a game in the form of fishing using leber or fishing era. A total of 7 minutes or 20 percent game time is granted to a user who purchases a license of 10,000 won, and a total of 7 minutes or 20 minutes or more is added to a user who fishes water, and a number of hours increases by adding points depending on the type and number of the water scrap season. A user may fish a water scrap season by manipulating the lebur or fishing era. However, if a user can do so, without the user’s participation, the game can automatically progress and obtain points. In the electronic device inside the apparatus, the screen, winning points are set in advance, and the winning points obtained from the game can be easily exchanged with cash or coophone medium, and in light of the unit amount, etc., it is difficult to see that a child or juvenile uses a water scrap machine.

(2) Whether it violates the principle of trust protection.

(A) In general in administrative legal relations, in order to apply the principle of protection of trust to an act of an administrative agency, first, the administrative agency should name the public opinion that is the subject of trust to an individual; second, the administrative agency's statement of opinion that is justifiable and trusted to the individual; third, the individual should have trusted and trusted the opinion statement; third, the administrative agency should have conducted any act corresponding thereto; fourth, the administrative agency's disposition contrary to the above opinion statement that is contrary to the above opinion statement, thereby infringing the individual's interest; last, when taking an administrative disposition in accordance with the above opinion statement, it should not be likely to seriously undermine the public interest or legitimate interests of a third party (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Du13592, Feb. 24, 2006).

(B) In the instant case, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiffs purchased the instant organization and invested a huge amount of money by leasing the place of business, and even if they invested a enormous amount of money by trust in the continued confirmation inspection of the A Association as alleged by the Plaintiffs, it cannot be readily concluded that the instant organization is a machine without speculative nature, as seen earlier, and thus, it would seriously undermine the public interest by causing social confusion, such as promoting speculative acts, etc. If such permission is granted, and such public interest may not be deemed to be negligible compared to the degree of infringement on the Plaintiffs’ private interest. Therefore, it is difficult to deem the instant disposition to violate the principle of trust protection.

3. Conclusion

All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed, and the losing plaintiffs bear the costs of lawsuit.

Judges Yoon Young-man

Judges Choi Young-hoon