부당이득금부과처분취소 등
1. Each appeal by the plaintiffs and the defendant is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
The reasoning of the judgment of this court, which cited the judgment of the court of first instance, is the same as that of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment as stated in paragraph (2) below, which is alleged by the defendant in the first instance. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of
The Defendant asserts to the effect that the portion added is unlawful as it goes beyond the scope of statutory interpretation, even though it is clear that the portion additionally collected under the text of Article 13-2(1)2 of the Act is not only the wrongfully received subsidies but also the entire amount of the registered farmland subsidies.
In light of the contents of Article 13(1) of the Act, the scope of subsidies to be returned pursuant to Article 13-2(1)1 of the Act includes: (a) the entire amount of subsidies for all registered farmland is unclear; (b) the scope of subsidies subject to additional collection pursuant to Article 13-2(1)2 of the Act is difficult to be clearly specified from the language and text of the aforementioned provision; and (c) the degree of excess of subsidies that are unlawfully received is not unlawfully received; and (d) the effect of sanctions may substantially increase when the portion of subsidies illegally received among the entire subsidies is smaller than that of the wrongfully received subsidies; and (e) the meaning of “unlawful method” under Article 13(1)1 of the Act may be aggravated; and (e) the amendment of Article 13-2(1)2 of the Act includes Article 13-13(1)3 of the Act.