beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.06.18 2014구합32374

과징금부과처분취소

Text

1. The Defendant’s penalty surcharge of KRW 11,620,000 against the Plaintiff on July 3, 2014 regarding “The Home Plus Incheon Training Point.”

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff operated the Home Pack Incheon Training Point (hereinafter “instant store”), which is a large retailer located in Yeonsu-gu Incheon, and displayed and sold goods in MAP (hereinafter “instant goods”) using the MAP method from August 16, 2012 to July 28, 2013 (hereinafter “instant enterprise”). The Plaintiff operated freezing and shellfish from the enterprise “A” (hereinafter “instant enterprise”) to operate the said store, and displayed and sold them for three days.

B. On July 3, 2014, the Defendant imposed a penalty surcharge of KRW 1,1620,000 as substitute for the suspension of business pursuant to Articles 7, 75, and 82 of the former Food Sanitation Act (amended by Act No. 11985, Jul. 30, 2013; hereinafter “former Food Sanitation Act”) on the ground that “FF fishery products which were operated in the state of refrigerating for more than 24 hours and were displayed for sale for three days and violated the standards for preservation and distribution” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 4 (including each number in case of additional evidence), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant product is packaging fishery products carried out using the advanced packing method (MAP method). Since there was no provision on the packing method as to such method, such sales act does not constitute a violation of the former Food Sanitation Act. 2) Even if the Plaintiff’s act violates the former Food Sanitation Act, the Plaintiff knew that the instant product was a processed food or refrigerating that is not a freezing food under the former Food Sanitation Act, and thus, there was no intention or liability for such violation.

3. Furthermore, even if the sales volume is low, and there is no risk to people, the defendant's imposition of a penalty surcharge in lieu of seven days of business suspension, which is the maximum limit of the disposition standards, is deviating from and abused discretion.