Whether the license for the transfer of a herb druggist of the Mayor of Seoul Metropolitan Government is delegated to the head of the competent public health clinic (affirmative)

According to Articles 35(3) and 37(2) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, Article 24 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, Article 5-2 of the Act on the Provisional Measures for Local Autonomy, and Article 5(17 of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ordinance on the Delegation of Administrative Authority, the license for the transfer of a herb druggist of the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City is delegated to the director of the competent public health clinic in accordance with the provisions of the Act,

Articles 35(3) and 37(2) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, Article 24 of the Enforcement Rule of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, Article 5-2 of the Act on Temporary Measures for Local Autonomy, Article 5 subparag. 17 of the Seoul Metropolitan Government Ordinance on Delegation of Administrative Authority

Plaintiff’s Attorney Lee Jae-soo

The Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Head of the Public Health Center and eight defendants' attorneys Kim Chang-do, Counsel for the defendant

Seoul High Court Decision 86Gu602 delivered on March 11, 1987

The case shall be reversed and remanded to the Seoul High Court.

As to the Grounds of Appeal:

Article 24 of the Enforcement Rule of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, which is a basis provision for permission for the transfer of a herb druggist, is based on Article 35(3) and Article 37(2) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, and the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ordinance on Administrative Delegation is based on Article 5-2 of the Act on the Provisional Measures for Local Autonomy, and Article 5(17 of the same Ordinance is delegated to the director of the public health clinic with the authority concerning Article 35 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act.

Thus, the right to license the transfer of herb druggist's business office is delegated to the head of the competent public health clinic in Seoul Special Metropolitan City pursuant to the provisions of the law, and this is the change of legal attribution of the authority.

Nevertheless, the court below's determination that the return of the request for the transfer of the herb druggist of this case by the defendants was null and void because it did not regard it as such but as internal delegation of authority is derived from misunderstanding the legal nature of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ordinance on Delegation of Administrative Authority, or misunderstanding the legal principles as to the delegation of authority by the administrative agency. The issue of this point

Therefore, the original judgment shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kim Yong-ju (Presiding Justice)