Whether the absence of a long-term publication of periodicals constitutes grounds for revocation of registration under Article 12 (2) 2 of the Registration, etc. of Periodicals Act.

Article 12 (2) 2 of the Registration, etc. of Periodicals Act provides that the registration of a periodical may be cancelled when the contents of the periodical are seriously and repeatedly violated the purpose of the publication and the contents of the publication. If the periodical is not published, the contents of the periodical do not exist. Therefore, it cannot be said that the contents of the periodical violate the purpose of the publication or the contents of the publication. Thus, even if the publisher of the periodical does not publish the periodical for a long time unlike the contents of the registration, it does not constitute a ground for cancellation of

Article 12 (2) 2 of the Registration, etc. of Periodicals Act

Minister of Information

Seoul High Court Decision 201

The petitioner's application is dismissed.

The registration of the case principal company of this case shall be revoked on June 10, 1988 by the applicant of the Economic Day of Periodicals.

In full view of each evidence attached to the record of this case and the whole purport of the examination, the principal company of this case may recognize the fact that on June 10, 198, the registration number 'A-63', 'A-63', 'Korea Economic Day Report', 'the representative director of the issuer', 'the Economic Day Report on the Stock Company', 'the report, commentaries, and public opinion on the economy and industry, 'the contribution to the development of the national economy by promptly and accurately providing new technical information, 'the contribution to the development of the national economy', 'the contents of the publication', 'the contents of the publication within 12 pages, 'the contents corresponding to the above purpose of publication', 'the publication and distribution on a regular basis once a day from September 28, 190, 'the above newspaper was completely suspended and the office was closed.

The applicant asserts that the case principal company did not publish a newspaper once a day according to the registered publication contents, but did not publish a newspaper for not less than four years from April 1, 1990 to the present day. Thus, the applicant asserts that the registered publication purpose and publication contents of periodicals constitute “when the registered publication purpose and publication contents are significantly repeated” under Article 12(2)2 of the Registration, etc. of Periodicals Act, and sought the revocation of the registration.

However, the above provision allows the cancellation of registration when the contents of the periodical are seriously and repeatedly violated the purpose of the publication and the contents of the publication, and if the periodical is not published, there is no content of the periodical. Therefore, it cannot be said that the contents of the periodical are in violation of the purpose of the publication or the contents of the publication. Thus, even if the principal company does not publish a newspaper for a long time differently from the contents of the registration, it cannot be viewed as a ground for cancellation of the registration of the periodical under Article 176 (1) 2 of the Commercial Act, on the ground that it constitutes "when the company suspends its business for more than one year without justifiable grounds" under Article 176 (1) 2 of the Commercial Act.

Therefore, the petitioner's application of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Jae-hyung (Presiding Judge)