beta
(영문) 대법원 2016.12.27 2016두48102

과징금부과처분취소

Text

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to Articles 44(2)4, 75(1)13, and 82(1) of the former Food Sanitation Act (amended by Act No. 1402, Feb. 3, 2016; hereinafter “Food Sanitation Act”), no food service business operator may provide juveniles alcoholic beverages, and impose sanctions, such as suspending all or part of business for a fixed period not exceeding six months, or penalty surcharges not exceeding 200 million won, in lieu of business suspension.

Meanwhile, Article 82(2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Food Sanitation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26180, Mar. 30, 2015; Presidential Decree No. 26180, “former Enforcement Decree prior to the amendment”; hereinafter “former Enforcement Decree”) which provides for the standards for calculating penalty surcharges imposed in lieu of the disposition of business suspension, etc. according to delegation of Article 82(2) of the Food Sanitation Act, provides that “the amount of penalty surcharges corresponding to one day of business suspension” under Article 53 [Attachment Table 1] shall be amended to change “the amount of penalty surcharges corresponding to one day of business suspension.” Article 2 of the Addenda provides that “The standards for penalty surcharges for violations prior to the enforcement of this Decree shall be governed by the previous provisions, notwithstanding the amended provisions of subparagraph 2 of the

Therefore, Article 53 [Attachment 1] 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act shall apply to the imposition of penalty surcharges in lieu of the disposition of business suspension on the grounds that a food service business operator provided alcoholic beverages to juveniles before the enforcement of the revised Enforcement Decree.

2. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment, on November 16, 2014, prior to the enforcement of the amended Enforcement Decree, the Defendant was aware of the instant disposition imposing a penalty surcharge in lieu of the disposition of business suspension on the ground that the Plaintiff, a food service business operator, provided alcoholic beverages to juveniles.

According to the legal principles as seen earlier, the Enforcement Decree of the Amendment.