2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Plaintiff

A is a person who has obtained a fishery permit from the Defendant by using a coastal fishing boat C, coastal fishing D, and coastal fishing E, while the Plaintiff B is a person who has obtained a fishery permit from the Defendant by using a coastal fishing boat F, coastal improvement fishing G, coastal fishing H.

On July 10, 2016, the Plaintiffs: (a) used one fishing gear at the 2.4 nautical miles from the northwest Sea of the Sinsan City in the year of Gun-si; (b) was discovered to the Seo Sea Fisheries Management Body during the operation; and (c) on November 24, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition of suspending respective fishery permits to the Plaintiffs for 20 days.

(hereinafter “each disposition of this case”). (hereinafter “each disposition of this case”), each statement of Gap’s 1 through 3 (including a serial number, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the entire purport of each disposition of this case is legitimate, and each disposition of this case as a whole, each disposition of this case is not complied with by the deadline for submitting opinions (not less than 15 days) as stipulated in Article 21(1) of the Administrative Procedures Act and Article 5 of the Rules on the Administrative Measures and Procedures for Violations of Fisheries-Related Acts and subordinate statutes (hereinafter “the Rules of this case”) and the disposition of suspension of fishery permission has been issued before the deadline for submitting opinions.

Article 45-3 (2) attached Table 3-3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Fisheries Act, which is the basis for each disposition of this case

2. Coastal fisheries.

B. The portion of prohibition of use of fishing nets, which is a tax item net (hereinafter “instant Enforcement Decree provision”) stipulated matters beyond the scope of delegation under Article 64-2 of the Fisheries Act, which is an upper law, concerning the prohibited area and prohibition period of use of fishing gear, as well as the matters beyond the scope of delegation under the upper law. Since the Plaintiffs’ freedom of choice of occupation is infringed, each disposition of this case must be revoked.

It shall be as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

Judgment

Article 21 (1) of the Administrative Procedures Act shall apply to the parties.