logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.02.04 2014누61936
기타(일반행정)
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case by the court of first instance is that of the first instance judgment, except for the addition under the judgment on the assertion that the defendant emphasizes in particular in this court, and thus, it is consistent with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination as to the assertion that the notice of this case did not violate the principle of proportionality

A. The Defendant’s summary of the assertion is not a mandatory certification that does not obtain the certification in question, but a voluntary certification system that gives incentives to products with at least a certain level to achieve policy objectives. Therefore, the Defendant, who has the authority to set the standards for certification of excellent recycled products pursuant to the relevant statutes, should be deemed to have a substantial wide range of refluence in the establishment of the standards in order to achieve the policy purpose of expanding the demand for recycled products and promoting the development of recycling technology.

Furthermore, it is practically impossible to verify physically and chemically whether the relevant product has the composition of the actual recycled product, and therefore, it is the most reliable and effective means to keep an implied facility in the relevant factory. The decision that the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology decided to use the excellent recycled product as the textbook site is not the legal effect of the certification itself, but the reflective effect according to the policy decision of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. The portion of the textbook site in the Plaintiff’s total sales is less than 0.6%, and it is very low in the Plaintiff’s portion of the textbook site, and the support for the development of implicit technology and the commercialization of technology is also the policy purpose of the excellent recycled product certification system. Furthermore, the notified portion of this case is also the notified part.

arrow