The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles);

(a) simple mooring of a vessel that can be immediately moved is not subject to permission for occupancy and use of public waters;

B. Even if the above act is subject to permission for occupation and use of public waters, it constitutes a justifiable act that does not contravene social norms.

2. Determination

A. The Supreme Court has held that the meaning of occupation and use of public waters falls under the so-called special use that is used for a specific purpose as a "type and fixed use" separate from the general use for public waters, rivers, or roads with respect to the meaning of occupation and use of public waters, rivers, or roads.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da68485, Oct. 15, 2004; Supreme Court Decision 92Nu13325, May 11, 1993). In particular, the Supreme Court held that the Defendant cannot be deemed to have occupied and used a sandy beach, which is a specific part of public waters (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do12529, Nov. 25, 2010) by leasing ten scoos to unspecified tourists without obtaining permission from the competent authorities, and thus, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have occupied and used a sandy beach, which is a specific part of public waters (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do12529, Nov. 25, 2010).

The general use referred to in the above precedents refers to the free use of a dynasical public object in accordance with its original usage, and the special use means the exclusive use of a specific part of a public object to a certain extent for a specific purpose, separate from the general use of a dynasical public.

In full view of the Public Waters Management and Reclamation Act (hereinafter “Public Waters Act”) and relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, the Public Waters Act separates occupancy and use fees, usage fees, and occupation and use fees subject to permission. In the case of the River Act, it does not clearly distinguish occupancy and use fees, but it does not clearly distinguish occupancy and use fees.