2. Stock Company*

3. Limited Liability Company*

Preliminaryly, on April 21, 201, the defendant's notification of the improvement plan for the collection and transportation of domestic waste and the entrustment of street cleaning services to the plaintiffs on Kimhae-si.

A. From 1989 to 1989, the Plaintiffs entered into an entrustment contract with the Defendant for the collection, transportation, and street cleaning of household wastes in Kimhae-si, and have been engaged in the collection, transportation, and street cleaning of household wastes in each of the three consignment areas in the Defendant city.

B. On April 21, 2011, in order to actively prepare for the increase of population and changes in the revision of the Wastes Control Act, the Defendant issued a notification of a plan to improve the entrusted business for domestic waste collection, transportation, and street cleaning agency (hereinafter “instant notification”). On May 11, 201, the Defendant issued a notification of a plan to improve the entrusted business for domestic waste collection, transportation, and street cleaning agency (hereinafter “instant notification”) to the effect that the Plaintiffs are planned to adjust the entrusted areas from 2012 to 5 existing, and the three areas are to perform the entrusted duties and to select the remaining two areas through open recruitment.

1. Persons subject to collection and transportation: Collection and transportation of household wastes (living wastes, food wastes, recyclables, and large volume wastes) generated from Kim Sea-si, and 2. Entrustment period: From January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012 (1) years);

3. Agency area: two areas.

(a) Zone Four: Northwest-dong, Jin-gu, Jin-Eup, and Han Myeon;

(b) Zone Five: At the time of the public announcement by the participants, he/she shall obtain permission for the business of collecting and transporting domestic wastes at Kimhae-si as of the date of public announcement by the participants; 8. He/she shall exclude the participation of the executives and employees of a corporation or a corporation operating business;

(f) To preferentially succeed to employment of the existing agency (three previous agencies) and drivers following the adjustment of the cleaning zone without changing employment conditions (to submit a letter of commitment to employment succession);

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 and 2 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. As to the public notice disposition of this case (the part on the main claim)

1) The defendant's main defense

A) The Defendant, as a private business entity and a private business entity selected pursuant to the instant public notice disposition, entered into a contract on the collection and transportation of household garbage on an equal footing. The instant public notice disposition, which is the pre-stage stage of the contract, falls under the inducement of subscription under private law, and cannot be deemed a disposition. (B) Since relevant laws, such as the Wastes Control Act, do not have a provision on the “interest legally protected to the Plaintiffs, an existing business entity,” the Plaintiffs are not entitled to the Plaintiff as

2) Determination

A) Disposition taken in relation to the instant public notice disposition

Article 2 (1) 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act provides that the term "disposition, etc." means the exercise or refusal of public power as an enforcement of law with respect to specific facts by an administrative agency, and other similar administrative actions and rulings on administrative appeals."

According to Article 14 of the former Wastes Control Act (amended by Act No. 10389, Jul. 23, 2010; hereinafter the same) with respect to the instant case, the disposal of domestic wastes is the duties of the head of a Si/Gun/Gu, etc., and the head of a Si, etc. shall dispose of them by himself/herself or have a waste disposal business operator collect and transport them by proxy as prescribed by municipal ordinances of the relevant local government. Even if the entrustment was in the form of a contract under private law, this is still an act of a local government, and the Plaintiffs have been disposing of the entire domestic wastes, etc. from around 1989 to the date of Kimhae-si. In full view of the fact that the collection and transportation area of domestic wastes, etc. has been reduced from 2012 due to the instant public announcement disposition, the instant disposition constitutes an exercise of public authority,

(b)Standing to sue;

Even if a third party is not the direct counter-party to an administrative disposition, if the legal interest protected by the administrative disposition is infringed by the law due to the administrative disposition, he/she shall be entitled to be judged by the propriety of the administrative disposition by filing an administrative litigation seeking the cancellation or nullity of the administrative disposition, and the term "legal interest" refers to a case where there is individual, direct, and specific interest protected by the relevant laws and regulations and regulations. Generally, in a case where the law, which is the basis of a beneficial administrative disposition such as a license, authorization, permission, etc., generally aims at preventing unreasonable management due to excessive competition among the relevant enterprisers, it shall be eligible to seek the cancellation of the relevant administrative disposition even if the existing enterpriser is not the counter-party to the administrative disposition such as a license, authorization, permission, etc., which is conducted with the same kind of license, authorization, permission, etc., granted to another enterpriser in advance (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Du6716, Jul. 28, 2006).

According to Article 14 of the former Wastes Control Act, disposal of domestic wastes is a business of the head of a Si/Gun/Gu (hereinafter referred to as the "Mayor, etc."). The Mayor, etc. may dispose of them by himself/herself or have a waste disposal business operator under Article 25 of the former Wastes Control Act vicariously perform collection, transportation, etc. under the conditions as prescribed by the Municipal Ordinance of the relevant local government. The disposal of domestic wastes is a business which requires a strong public interest. ② Under Article 25(7) of the former Wastes Control Act and Article 10(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 23126, Sept. 7, 2011), the Minister of Environment or the Mayor/Do governor is not obliged to attach conditions necessary for the improvement of the Plaintiffs' living convenience, surrounding environmental protection, and efficient management of the waste disposal business. Under Article 9(1) of the former Ordinance on the Management of Domestic Wastes, the Mayor is not required to consider the current generation of domestic wastes and its existing waste disposal business operator's disposal and disposal capacity within his/her jurisdiction.

C) Sub-determination

Therefore, all of the defendant's defenses are without merit.

B. Regarding the notice of this case (the part on preliminary claim)

1) The Defendant’s main defense

The comprehensive plan on dividing the cleaning zone at Kimhae-si and setting an appropriate number of agency companies is merely an internal business plan or business plan at Kimhae-si, and even if it was notified to the plaintiffs who are the existing waste disposal business operators, the above notification does not constitute an administrative disposition.

2) Determination

On the other hand, the following circumstances recognized by the facts revealed in the process of dispositions and the purport of the entire argument, namely, the comprehensive plan to increase the area entrusted with waste disposal in Kimhae-si and determine the number of appropriate agencies, etc., is limited to the internal business plan or business plan in Kimhae-si, and only concrete it through the new agency's public announcement, etc., affects the rights and obligations of the plaintiffs. ② The notification in this case is merely that the defendant's prior notification in this case is sufficient to inform the plaintiffs in advance of the fact that the new agency is to increase the area entrusted with waste disposal in Kimhae-si, and that the new agency is to select the new agency, and there is no provision for the above notification procedures to the existing agency prior to the selection of the new agency under the related Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Wastes Control Act, and ③ Even if the defendant requested the plaintiffs to reply to the plaintiffs on the increase in the area entrusted with waste disposal, it is difficult to view that there is any legal effect prior to the alteration of the agency entrusted with waste disposal. Therefore, the notification in this case's internal business plan is not reasonable.

3. Judgment on the merits (main claim)

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

1) According to Article 9(1) of the Ordinance on the Management of Wastes in Kim Sea, where deemed necessary in consideration of the current and future domestic waste generation quantity and the collection, transportation, and disposal capabilities of the existing domestic waste disposal business operators, the Mayor shall recruit new enterprises. The increase in the domestic waste in Kim Sea is limited to 0.27% per annum, and even if the plaintiffs who are the existing agents dispose of domestic waste without any defects, the defendant's recruitment of new enterprises is in violation of the above provision.

2) In a case where the existing administrative act is practice and the legitimate trust is formed, it should be protected. Since 1989, the plaintiffs have properly treated the domestic waste, etc. from around 1989, the plaintiffs' three companies' collection and transportation vehicles were not sufficient to dispose of the domestic waste, etc. at the time of Kimhae due to the total of 98 vehicles and 250 employees, etc., and the plaintiffs' increase in collection and transportation vehicles and employees could continue the entrusted business with increased equipment and personnel. However, the defendant violated the principle of trust protection by taking the instant public notice disposition that increases the burden of the entrusted agency expenses without any special public interest purpose.

3) Since the consignment area is adjusted due to the instant public announcement disposition, and the consignment area that the Plaintiffs will act as proxy is reduced, the Plaintiffs are forced to dispose of approximately 40% of the collected and transported vehicles owned by the Plaintiffs or dispose of them by the scrap metal. This is against the Defendant’s right to private property under Article 23(1) of the Constitution. In addition, the average service period of the workers belonging to the Plaintiffs is seven years.

While receiving a considerable amount of wages, it is difficult to guarantee their work experience when they are transferred to a new company, and even though workers oppose this, the defendant infringed the interests of workers.

4) The annual increase in domestic waste in Kimhae-si has failed to produce, and the plaintiffs who are existing agents have properly treated it, and the defendant's report on proper scale of domestic waste collection and transportation company's proper size of business is inappropriate to use it as basic data as the content of "2009 Seoul Metropolitan Government research on proper scale of domestic waste collection and transportation company's proper size of business" which is the basis of the increase in the entrusted area. The new company's recruitment is not merely to improve the domestic waste disposal capacity, but to simply increase the deposit cost from the existing three to five companies. The public notice disposition in this case has increased only the above deposit cost due to the public notice disposition in this case, and there is a concern for the establishment of the agency. Thus, the public notice disposition in this case violates the principle of proportionality in comparison with the private interest and public interest, and it is unlawful that the defendant abused its discretionary power.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

(c) Fact of recognition;

1) From around 1989, Kimhae-si entrusted three enterprises with the collection and transportation of wastes generated from Kimhae-si. The population was around 1989 to 190,00,000 as the population was integrated into 2,65,000 and 400,000 as the population was increased respectively, and thereafter, the population was 2% or more per year around October 2010 and reached 50,000 as the population was 50,000,000 around 2050,000. 2) Domestic wastes, recycled goods, and market price were 110,282,97 tons in 209,110,525,000 tons in 205,000 tons in 205,205. 205% in 205,205. 205% in 205,295% in 205.

3) Plaintiffs***** The limited liability company currently holds 30 vehicles for collection and transportation (1 ton) and 16 ton, 1 ton, 1 ton, 5 ton ton (4.5 ton), 11 ton, and 23 ton ton, Plaintiff Co., Ltd.****** 34 ton of collected and transported vehicles (1 ton or 11.5 ton), 1 ton, 14 ton ton, and 20 ton ton, and Plaintiff Limited Company*** 30 ton ton of collected and transported vehicles (0.5 ton).

4) The Defendant, on the basis of “the appropriate scale of service reports (O. 2010) of domestic waste collection and transportation companies (O. 2010)” (hereinafter “the instant report”), increased the consignment area of Kimhae-si from 3 to 5. A plan was formulated to add two new companies to 3 existing companies. The main contents of the service report are as follows.

Chapter 4. Evaluation of the appropriate scale by standard work analysis of the appropriate scale of domestic waste collection and transportation business

2. If it is assumed that the collection cost of three kinds of domestic wastes (mix, food, and recycled wastes) according to the quantity of the collection is collected from one company, the change in the quantity of the collection is obvious until 2,400 tons per ton of the monthly collection cost, and the change in the collection cost is very complete in more than 2,400 tons, and the collection cost at this time was found to have been KRW 100,00 per ton of the collection cost. The collection cost of KRW 2,400 per ton of the monthly collection cost is 938 tons of mixed-waste, food waste 1,262 tons, and recycling 19 tons of the total quantity of the collection cost of Kimhae-si as the domestic wastes discharged from the same space. On account of this, since three collection and transportation companies at the time of entrustment to the private sector are currently engaged in collection and transportation at the same time, it is difficult to maintain the economic scale of the collection and transportation business entity.

Section B. Proper scale of a collection and transportation agency

1. The current status of entrustment of a local agency with a population of at least 500,000 to the private sector is as follows. Some areas are directly operated and entrusted to the private sector, and the street cleaning is operated directly:

A person shall be appointed.

2. As a result of analyzing the cost of collecting domestic wastes through the analysis of adequate scale of business entrusted by an agency, there was a cost and economic scale that reduces the cost of collecting domestic wastes even if the collection volume increases, in the case of not less than 1,60 tons/months, food waste 1,250 tons/months, and at least 1,000 tons/months. In addition, considering the cleaning administrative aspect, the current four companies are currently engaged in collection and transportation as an agent, and three companies are collecting and transporting wastes in the dispute zone due to the labor dispute of one company, but the lack of human resources and equipment causes a enormous obstacle to the cleaning work of the Gu office.

If a labor dispute occurs in the Kimhae-si, it is impossible to collect more than 65,210 tons of the waste generated by the Busan Jin-gu Office, and more than 1.6 times the waste generated by the Busan Jin-gu Office.

In light of the above results, the cost and economic scale of the agency for collection of Kimhae-si is determined to be 2,160 tons per month according to the conditions of collecting mixed wastes, food waste, and recycled goods together in the same area, and the appropriate number of the agency is 4.58, and it is desirable that the appropriate number of the agency will be 4-5 if considering the increase in population in the future.

Part V Proposals and Conclusion

Although statistical data analysis on 108 enterprises of Seoul Metropolitan Government differs from the characteristics of the Kimhae-si, it is identical to the labor-intensive form due to the characteristics of the work of collecting and transporting wastes. Therefore, considering the problems that are compared with the results, first, the efficiency of harvest is reduced due to the increase of harvest, second, the safety device for collection and transportation due to the strike is insufficient.

이를 개선하기 위해서는 생활폐기물 수집·운반업 허가요건 및 허가체계에서의 적격심사 등 상황변화에 따라 비용과 효율의 시너지 효과를 높일 수 있는 제도적 장치가 마련되어야 한다. 참고자료 구·군 생활쓰레기 수집·운반업무 민간위탁운용의 문제점 및 개선방안 연구용역(부산광역시) | 서울시 생활폐기물 수집운반업체 적정영업규모 연구환경부 생활폐기물 수집, 운반처리 대행제도 개선방안연구

5) The main contents of the 'Implementation Plan for the Improvement of Clean Administrative Measures' dated April 5, 201 at Kimhae-si are as follows:

1. Background for improving cleaning administration;

1. Promotion of the collection and transportation of domestic wastes by the present three companies from 90 to 25.6% of their self-reliance in the amount of KRW 6,458,00 (sale-based plastic garbage bags totaling KRW 5,534,00,000, KRW 16,136,328,000 of the cost of excessive collection and transportation required for the reorganization of the system for the collection and transportation of household garbage, and KRW 9,000 of the cost of disposal, KRW 9,013,65,00 of the cost of disposal, KRW 25,93,00 of the cost of disposal, KRW 6,458,00,000 of the cost of waste disposal, and KRW 924,00 of the cost

○ Establishment of a stable cleaning administrative system in preparation for non-predictation

○ Refusal to establish a new competition system by improving the monopoly status of the existing companies and to establish a new competition system three copies of cleaning agency contracts in 2011.

II.Detailed Implementation Plans

1. A system for collecting and transporting household wastes as at a standardized terms and conditions for the reorganization of a system for collecting and transporting household wastes;

○ Cleaning agency by sharing the area within three agencies of cleaning agency;

○ Collection and Transport Wastes: Living wastes, food wastes, recyclables, street cleaning 201 agency fees: 16,401,084,00 won

○ Enforcement: The current status of the agency from 1990 to 20 years (20 years from 190)

A person shall be appointed.

The necessity of reorganization

It is necessary to establish a system suitable for a large city with a population of 180,000;

- From 90 years to 10 years, three existing companies are exclusively engaged in the collection and transportation of domestic wastes;

- needs for a new cleaning system by entering the large city with a population of 500,000;

○ Establishment of a stable cleaning administrative system against the unpredicted situation

- Where one or two vicarious companies are cleaning for the intra-corporate and extra-corporate problems, the occurrence of an in-house cleaning column;

- - secure adequate enterprises and are capable of immediately responding to the mobilization of the remaining enterprises;

○ An enterprise holding at least five cities with a population of 50 to 600,000 from 00 to 00 to 00 to 00 to a new competitive system for improving the exclusive position of the existing enterprise: Southyang-ju 7, Ansan-11, Jeonyang-ju 5, Sungsung-sung 5, 2010 if the agency fees for each enterprise in 2010 are more than other cities: 4.8 billion won, 5.3 billion won, 5.9 billion won (area, waste, large volume): Changwon-ju, Jin-ju, 1.4 billion won, 1.6 billion won, 1.7 billion won, 1.7 billion won, and 1.7 billion won, street cleaners, etc. belonging to the Plaintiffs of the company, were required to withdraw from 1.5 billion won to 1.7 billion won, 2011, * 5.7 billion won, 1.6 billion won, requesting the withdrawal of a private enterprise's employment security 5-3 months or 3 months, etc.

7) The Defendant has paid the Plaintiffs each year the retirement benefit reserve of their employees (operators, normal and US dollarss), the depreciation costs of equipment maintenance sites, and the depreciation costs of equipment as a cleaning agency service costs. [Grounds for recognition] The Defendant did not dispute, the entry of Gap 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, Eul 1, 2, 6, and 7, and the purport of the entire pleadings as a whole.

D. Determination

1) Claim of violation of the provisions of the Ordinance on Waste Management in Kimhae-si

Article 9 (1) of the Ordinance on Waste Management in Kim Sea-si may, if deemed necessary in consideration of the current and future domestic waste generation quantity and the collection, transportation, and disposal capabilities of the existing domestic waste disposal business entity pursuant to Article 14 (2) of the Act, require any of the following persons to collect, transport, or dispose of the living waste discharged within his/her jurisdiction on his/her behalf, and in such cases, the new designated entity shall comply with a public offering: Provided, That this shall not apply where the collection, transportation, and disposal of domestic waste from a construction site is performed by proxy:

In light of the following circumstances, i.e., (i) the population size of 50,00 city Kimhae-si and the quantity of domestic wastes generated ( approximately 110,820 tons), the appropriate number of waste disposal agencies is calculated as 4.58, but Kim Jong-si currently entrusts three of the plaintiffs with the collection and transportation of domestic wastes. (ii) In the case of other cities with a population similar to Kim Jong-si, there are 4 through 7 kinds of waste disposal agencies to collect and transport the new wastes; (iii) the disposal of domestic wastes is strongly required; (iv) the new waste disposal agencies can not be seen as being able to collect and transport new domestic wastes on the ground that the new waste disposal agencies can not be seen as being able to collect and transport new wastes on the ground that the new waste disposal agencies can not be seen as being able to collect and dispose of new wastes on the ground that the new waste disposal agencies can not be seen as being able to collect and dispose of new wastes on the basis of an annual increase in the quantity of domestic waste disposal agencies.

2) argument that violates the principle of trust protection.

In general, in administrative legal relations, in order to apply the principle of the protection of trust to the acts of the administrative agency, the first administrative agency should name the public opinion that is the object of trust to the individual, second, the administrative agency should have no reason attributable to the individual when the statement of opinion is well-grounded, third, the individual should have trusted that the name of opinion is well-grounded, and third, the administrative agency should have conducted any act contrary to the above statement of opinion. Fourth, the administrative agency should have made a disposition contrary to the above statement of opinion against the interests of the individual who trusted that name of the opinion. When meeting these requirements, the administrative agency's disposition is unlawful as an act contrary to the principle of the protection of trust (Supreme Court Decision 96Nu18380 delivered on September 12, 197).

The facts that the Defendant entrusted the collection and transportation of domestic wastes, etc. generated from Kim Jong-si from around 1989 to about 23 years are as seen earlier. However, it is insufficient to deem that the Defendant continued to collect and transport domestic wastes, etc. in the future only to the Plaintiffs in the future, and there is no other evidence to deem that the Defendant issued a public opinion list. Thus, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit without any need to further examine the remainder of the issue.

3) Claims for infringement of private property rights and infringement of workers' interests

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the overall purport of the above facts and arguments, i.e., (i) if a new agency is selected by the public announcement of this case, the cleaning agency area of the plaintiffs reduced by 40%, and (ii) about 40% of the equipment such as street cleanerss, collection and transportation vehicles, etc., is inevitably accompanied in the process of increasing the waste disposal company to properly dispose of domestic waste, etc., but (ii) the defendant paid the retirement benefit reserve, equipment maintenance expenses, and the depreciation costs of equipment for street cleaners etc. to the plaintiffs each year, including cleaning service expenses, to the plaintiffs, it is difficult to deem that the loss of the plaintiffs' property can not be caused. (iii) In light of the fact that the new agency is expected to be inherited by adding the conditions of employment succession without changing the existing agency's employment condition, the public announcement of this case cannot be viewed as unlawful because it violated the plaintiffs' private property rights or employees' interests, and therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

4) Violation of the principle of proportionality and abuse of discretionary power

According to the witness testimony, Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 7, the whole purport of the arguments and arguments is as follows: (a) the plaintiffs collected and transported appropriately domestic wastes, etc. generated in Kimhae for about 23 years; (b) the annual amount of domestic wastes, etc. generated in Kimhae-si does not exceed 0.27%; and (c) there is no shortage in collecting and transporting increased domestic wastes, etc. only by the equipment and number of the plaintiffs possessed by the plaintiffs; (d) the plaintiffs collected and transported the domestic wastes, etc. in Kimhae-si for about 23 years, and there has been actual expectation that the plaintiffs can collect and transport the domestic wastes, etc. in the future, and only the plaintiffs can collect and transport them in the future; (e) therefore, it is desirable that the new companies should be added gradually to the new companies in light of the actual expectation of the plaintiffs formed for a long period of time by the defendants, or that the plaintiffs sell surplus equipment at an appropriate price to other City/Do waste disposal companies, or that

However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the purport of the above facts and arguments, namely, ① the collection, transportation, and disposal of domestic wastes, etc. under the relevant laws and regulations are the business of the market, and the market, etc. can be disposed of by itself or vicariously performed by the waste disposal company as prescribed by the Municipal Ordinance. As seen earlier, there is a considerable room for the administrative agency to discretion in determining the number of the agencies or the increase or decrease thereof, ② the collection, transportation, and disposal of domestic wastes, etc. are required to enhance the public interest, ② the selection of a new waste disposal company is required in light of the current state of domestic wastes, etc. at the time of Kim Sea, ③ the plaintiffs collected and transported the domestic wastes, etc. from around 1989 to about 23 years, and thus it seems that the competition is impeded by the new waste disposal company's entry into the market. On the other hand, the disposition of this case is in line with the public interest of the plaintiffs and the public interest of the defendant to achieve, and the defendant's discretionary authority is not abused.

4. Conclusion

Thus, the conjunctive lawsuit of this case is dismissed as it is inappropriate, and the plaintiffs' primary claim is dismissed as it is without merit.

Judges, real leaves

Judges Kim Jae-young