1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 29, 2014, the Plaintiff obtained permission from the Defendant for a large-scale fishing of Busan (No. 2013-007) and captured a high-light fishing and electric pit equivalent to approximately 560 kilograms in the main line A (fishing vessel No. B, 129 tons) and three auxiliary vessels (C, D, E (transport vessels) in the south East East East East East East East East East Sea (3,890 meters away from the main line of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province; hereinafter “instant fishing zone”).

(F) the fishing activity of this case (hereinafter referred to as the "fishing activity of this case").

Accordingly, on November 17, 2014, the Defendant issued a 20-day disposition of suspension of fishery (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Defendant captured cryp fishing in an area and period in which fishing is prohibited under Article 64-2 of the Fisheries Act” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion of this case should be revoked on the grounds that the disposition of this case is unlawful and unjust for the following reasons.

1) Article 45-3(2) [Attachment Table 3-3] of the Enforcement Decree of the Fisheries Act

1.(b)

The contents stipulated in the provisions on prohibition of operation are to exceptionally allow the operation of electric pits in a specific period or specific area, and it is not intended to prohibit the capture of high-light fishing in the instant operational area. Thus, the above provisions are not applicable to the instant operation.

2) The Plaintiff’s equipment means the equipment to find out the defense and distance of underwater target by Sarar and Solarping Anar, and sound detection equipment or sound searcher. The recording was administered for the purpose of capturing the pit after detecting the records of the pit, but unlike its intent, the high light was captured along with the pit, and the high light was already captured when he was aware of the fact that the high light was captured. The purpose of the Plaintiff was to capture a specific fish species in the operational technology of large-sized fishing.