Text
1. Among the plaintiffs B, C, E, and F's lawsuits, the part of the claim against the defendant's Korean Broadcasting System and the plaintiff A and D's lawsuits.
Reasons
Details of the disposition
Defendant Korean Broadcasting System is an institution established pursuant to Article 43(1) of the Broadcasting Act, which conducts radio broadcasting, television broadcasting, satellite broadcasting, etc.
Defendant Korea Broadcasting System has the authority to impose and collect a receiving fee of 2,500 won per month from a person who possesses a television receiver (hereinafter referred to as “TV receiver”) pursuant to Article 65 of the Broadcasting Act, and may entrust the business of collecting receiving fees to a person designated by himself/herself pursuant to Article 67(2) of the Broadcasting Act.
Defendant Korea Broadcasting System has entrusted Defendant Korea Electric Power Corporation with the collection of receiving fees from October 1994.
According to Article 43(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Broadcasting Act, when a person entrusted with the business of collecting receiving fees by the Korea Broadcasting System collects receiving fees, he/she may collect receiving fees in combination with an act of notifying the entrusted person in relation to
Accordingly, the defendant Korea Electric Power Corporation collects the license fees in combination with the collection of electric utility fees, which are its unique duties.
Plaintiff
B, C, E, and F filed an application with the Defendant Korea Broadcasting System for the collection of electricity charges and receiving fees collected in combination with existing ones on February 27, 2015, respectively.
However, the defendant Korean Broadcasting System rejected the above plaintiffs' applications on March 23, 2015.
Plaintiff
B, C, E, and F filed an application with the Korea Electric Power Corporation for the separate collection of electric utility charges and receiving fees on February 27, 2015. However, on April 9, 2015, Defendant Korea Electric Power Corporation also denied the said Plaintiffs’ application on the ground that the collection of receiving fees and electric utility charges from Defendant Korea Electric Power Corporation is allowed only when the collection of both the receiving fees and electric utility charges is increased in a lump sum, and that the said Plaintiffs’ application cannot be deemed to fall under such cases (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
Plaintiff
D, F, C, and A applied to Defendant Korea Broadcasting System for the collection of electric utility charges and receiving fees separately on May 19, 2015, but Defendant.