채굴권등록취소및소멸등록처분취소
1. The part concerning the claim for revocation of the registration of the extinguishment of extracting rights in the instant lawsuit shall be dismissed;
2. The plaintiff's remaining claims.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On January 3, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Sung Chang Industrial Development Co., Ltd., B, and C on January 22, 198 with respect to the extraction rights (hereinafter “the extraction rights of this case”) under which the period of existence was extended and registered as of January 22, 198, with regard to the purchase price as KRW 1 million, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the same day.
The term of extracting rights shall expire from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2015.
On June 25, 2014, the Defendant: (a) revoked the extraction right of this case by applying Article 35(2)6 of the Mining Industry Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”); and (b) registered ex officio termination of the extraction right of this case on the ground that “the Plaintiff continued to suspend extraction for at least one year without obtaining authorization from the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy pursuant to Article 42-2(2) of the Mining Industry Act; and (c) the same day.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Ex officio of the part seeking the revocation of the registration of the termination of extracting rights among the lawsuits in this case, the part seeking the revocation of the registration of the termination of extracting rights among the lawsuits in this case is lawful, and the plaintiff's claim for this part is a result of claiming the revocation of the cancellation of registration under the Mining Registration Decree, i.e., the cancellation of the cancellation of registration under the Mining Registration Act, and is ultimately seeking administrative benefits against an administrative agency (see Supreme Court Decision 65Nu145, Apr. 6, 196), and as such, a lawsuit seeking an administrative agency to seek the revocation of the registration of the termination of extracting rights is not allowed under the current Administrative Litigation Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Nu3200, Sept. 30, 197). Of the lawsuit in this case
3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's 1 procedural defect is specific in the defendant's public official in charge in the civil petition waiting room, where he/she is well aware of what hearing is.