The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Administrative laws and regulations, which serve as the basis for an indivative administrative disposition, must be strictly interpreted and applied, and shall not be excessively expanded or analogically interpreted in the direction unfavorable to the other party to the administrative disposition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Du13791, 13807, Feb. 28, 2008). Examining the aforementioned legal principles and records, the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, determined that the water quality inspection report of this case for groundwater, which is a residential water, does not constitute “inspection report” under Article 43(6)2 of the former Drinking Water Management Act (amended by Act No. 10154, Mar. 22, 2010), is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the scope of “inspection report”

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.