1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

The defendant alleged the claim on September 20, 2017.

Details of the disposition

The reasoning for this part of this Court is that the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance between two and ten pages 2 through 3 is the same. Thus, this part of the judgment is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Whether the instant disposition is legitimate

A. Article 23(2) of the Enforcement Rule of the Organ Transplant Act presented by the Plaintiff’s assertion is invalid as it limits the rights of the people without statutory delegation. Since the Defendant presented the grounds for disposition that cannot be found in the Organ Transplant Act, and issued the instant disposition, the instant disposition should be revoked as unlawful.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. 1) Determination 1) Whether Article 23(2)2(2) of the Enforcement Rule of the Organ Transplant Act violates the principle of statutory delegation, and this part of the reasoning is as stated in the corresponding part of the first instance judgment from 2 to 4 to 8. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. 2) First, whether the instant disposition is lawful or not, the “living person’s organ transplant service guidance” (hereinafter “the instant work guidance”) presented by the Defendant is called the “the instant work guidance.”

(1) We examine whether the instant disposition can be the basis for the instant disposition. (1) Article 23(2) of the Enforcement Rule of the Organ Transplant Act provides that the head of the National Organ Transplant Management Agency shall determine and publicly notify detailed matters concerning the procedure for approving the selection of transplant recipients in addition to the matters prescribed in paragraphs (1) through (3) of the aforementioned Article, with the exception of “where submitted documents have been prepared by falsity” or “where it is determined that the relationship with the organ donor, etc. and the transplant recipient is not clearly verified, and thus constitutes prohibited acts under Article 7 of the Act” (Article 23(2) of the Enforcement Rule of the Organ Transplant Management Agency.