전파사용료부과처분취소
All appeals are dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the lower court determined that “a radio station established by the State, etc.” under Article 67(1)1 of the Radio Waves Act should be deemed to mean “a radio station established by the State, etc.” at the time of imposing
Examining the contents and records of the relevant statutes, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the meaning of “establishment” under the Radio Waves Act, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.
2. As to the ground of appeal No. 2, the lower court determined that the installer of each of the instant wireless stations cannot be deemed the State on the ground that the Plaintiff was an independent public corporation separate from the State, and whether it constitutes “radio station established by the State” under Article 67(1)1 of the Radio Waves Act, based on the fact that it is irrelevant to whether the installer belongs to ownership of radio station facilities under the Radio Waves Act.
Examining the contents and records of the relevant statutes, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the concept of installer under the Radio Waves Act, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.
3. As to the ground of appeal No. 3, the lower court determined that, in the case of a maritime and aeronautical radio station, the installer’s name was exempted from radio wave fees on the above radio station, and thus, it cannot be deemed that it does not comply with the principle of equity with each
In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the principle of equity, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.
4. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and 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.