어업정지처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Details of the disposition
The Plaintiff obtained a fishery permit for the Chungcheongnam-nam Small Fishing Network C as the owner of a small-sized fishing boat B (17 tons, diesel 551 miles, hereinafter “instant vessel”).
On July 12, 2017, the captain D of the instant vessel was exposed to a fisheries supervising official while engaging in defrout fishing operation in a zone where the operation of a small-sized fishing vessel is prohibited on the sea of 15 days in South-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si.
On July 31, 2017, the Defendant rendered a 20-day disposition of the suspension of fisheries against the Plaintiff in violation of Article 64-2(1) of the Fisheries Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
The main text of Article 64-2(2) of the Fisheries Act, which is the basis for the disposition of this case, provides that "matters necessary to restrict the size, etc. of fishing gear" shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree, and matters concerning the criteria and procedures for disposition, such as restriction on fisheries, are comprehensively delegated to subordinate laws and subordinate statutes, and there is no provision regarding the scope of suspension period.
Furthermore, even if other provisions of the Fisheries Act or other related laws are systematically integrated, it is impossible to predict the range of the period of suspension of fisheries to be stipulated in the Ordinance of the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries, in particular, whether or not the upper limit
Since Article 64-2 (2) of the Fisheries Act is contrary to the principle of prohibition of comprehensive delegation, there is a ground for revocation of the disposition in this case.
Article 45-3 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Fisheries Act is an infringement on the freedom of occupation and property rights in violation of the principle of excess wage land, and the disposition of this case based on the above provision must be revoked in an unlawful manner.
Since the disposition of this case is significantly more unfavorable than the public interest purpose to be achieved by the plaintiff, the disposition of this case is illegal as it deviates from and abused discretion.