A. Whether the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy may issue an adjustment order to prohibit the manufacture, purchase, and sale of similar gasoline under the former Petroleum Business Act (amended by Act No. 3645 of Dec. 31, 1982) (negative)

(b) The case holding that the disposition to revoke permission for a petroleum retail business is beyond the scope of discretion;

A. The prohibition of the sale, storage, etc. of pseudo petroleum products manufactured by mixing petroleum products with petrochemicals is not subject to an order of coordination under Article 17 of the former Petroleum Business Act (amended by Act No. 3645 of Dec. 31, 1982). Therefore, the Minister of Energy may not issue an order of coordination to prohibit the manufacture, purchase, and sale of similar gasoline based on the above provision of the Act.

(b) The case holding that the disposition to revoke permission for a petroleum retail business is beyond the scope of discretion;

A. Article 17 of the former Petroleum Business Act (amended by Act No. 3645 of Dec. 31, 1982)

Supreme Court Decision 87Nu301 decided Nov. 8, 198 (Dong Branch) 87Nu437 decided Nov. 8, 1988 (Dong Branch)

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 et al.

Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor and one other

Seoul High Court Decision 86Gu842,86 Gu979 (Consolidated) Decided April 24, 1987

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the defendants.

1. We examine the grounds of appeal by Defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor (hereinafter “Defendant Mayor”).

According to Article 17 of the former Petroleum Business Act (amended by Act No. 3645 of Dec. 31, 1982), when it is deemed that the implementation of the petroleum supply and demand plan has been seriously impeded or is likely to be impeded, or when it is deemed that it is difficult to secure domestic required petroleum due to changes in international petroleum situation, the Minister of Energy may issue an order for coordination under subparagraphs 1 through 10, but it does not include any grounds for an order for adjustment to prohibit the sale, storage, etc. of pseudo petroleum products manufactured by mixing petroleum products with petrochemicals. Thus, prohibiting the sale, storage, etc. of pseudo petroleum products is not subject to an order for adjustment under the above Act. Therefore, the Minister of Energy cannot issue an order for adjustment to prohibit the manufacture, purchase, and sale of pseudo petroleum products based on the above provision of the Act.

Therefore, the court below's decision that the order for adjustment (paragraph 3) issued by the chief of power resource department on January 9, 1981 at the time of the original adjudication prohibiting the manufacture, purchase, and sale of similar gasoline is an object of non-regulation under Article 17 of the same Act, and thus, it is just to hold that the above order for adjustment has no validity, and it does not constitute an error of law such as a theory of litigation. Therefore, it is groundless to discuss this issue.

2. We examine the grounds of appeal by the defendant Gangseo chief of the fire station.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that the plaintiff was ordered to install dangerous substances and the permission to install a dangerous substance mobile storage tank (hereinafter referred to as the "permission of this case") by the defendant Kang Seo-gu chief of the fire station (hereinafter referred to as the "the defendant Seo-gu chief of the fire station") on April 17, 1985 that the investigation of the Gangseo Police Station and its employees collected gasoline samples and requested the National Science Investigation Institute to examine ingredients of gasoline, and the plaintiff was found to be mixed with Gyeong Seo-gu, the petrochemicals, the petrochemicals, etc., which is a petrochemicals of the gasoline, and that the plaintiff was ordered to take a summary order of KRW 1,00,000 from the Southern Branch of the Seoul District Court on February 6, 1986 and the defendant Seo-gu, notified the defendant Seo-gu chief of the court below and revoked the permission of the above petroleum selling business. The plaintiff's disposition of this case on July 25 of the same year, the plaintiff's appeal that the above defendant Seo-gu chief of the fire station did not know's knowledge that it did not know.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Ansan-man (Presiding Justice)