1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following judgments, thereby citing this as is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the instant disposition was lawful to prevent the emulsion of fishery resources as stipulated in Article 34(1)1 of the Fisheries Act, on the ground that, upon acceptance of the instant report, a report on sericultural fishing by those who did not enter into an event contract with the village fishing village fraternity can no longer be accepted, and thus, the public interest, such as proliferation and protection of fishery resources, cannot be achieved.

On the other hand, the legality of the instant disposition shall be determined at the time of the instant disposition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Du25125, Oct. 30, 2014). As seen earlier, since the Plaintiff currently continues to engage in sericultural fishing activities as a member of the fishing village fraternity C, the instant report is accepted, and it is difficult to deem that the public interest, such as proliferation and protection of fishery resources, cannot be achieved. The Defendant can separately determine whether to accept the instant report, and thus, the instant report cannot be deemed to have been accepted. In full view of the following, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.