하수도사용료 부과처분 취소
1. All of the plaintiffs' lawsuits of this case are dismissed.
2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.
1. Basic facts
A. In around 1988, Korea installed a terminal of wastewater collection (hereinafter “instant terminal of wastewater”) which flow into the instant treatment facilities by gathering the wastewater treatment facilities and the number of the waste therefrom in order to treat wastewater discharged from each place of business within the former DD Corporation (the name of the facility was changed to wastewater treatment facilities, public wastewater treatment facilities, according to the amendment of the law; hereinafter “the instant treatment facilities”).
On November 1, 1989, the head of the environmental administration who has managed the roads of this case delegated the management affairs to the Ri Mayor in accordance with the State Property Act and subordinate statutes.
B. In 195, Gisan-si was integrated into Yisan-si and Yasan-gun, and the Defendant succeeded to the management affairs of the instant conduit.
On the other hand, the disposal facilities of this case are currently managed and operated by E Company, which is a private entrusted management agency.
(c)
From February 2, 2019 to April 2019, the Defendant rendered a disposition to impose sewerage fees (hereinafter “instant disposition”) in accordance with the Sewerage Act on the ground that the Plaintiffs used the instant pipelines by discharging wastewater discharged from each workplace through the instant pipelines.
(d)
The Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit on May 7, 2019, and filed the instant lawsuit only falls under wastewater pipes under the Water Environment Preservation Act, and the instant pipelines do not fall under sewage pipes under the Sewerage Act, and thus the Defendant is not authorized to collect the usage fees under the Sewerage Act from the Plaintiff. The Ordinance on the Management and Operation of the Sewerage in Ysan-si established the authority to collect the usage fees for the instant pipelines, and the said Ordinance is too excessive in light of the actual management expenses. Therefore, the said Ordinance is null and void, and accordingly, the said Ordinance is accordingly unlawful to impose the usage fees for the instant pipelines.
E. The Defendant’s disposition of this case on November 17, 2020, during the instant lawsuit, is ex officio.