In a case where a mining right for any mineral is established, the existence of the mining right for the other mineral buried in the same mineral deposit within the mining area during the existence of the mining right (negative)

The purport of the provisions of Articles 5, 24, 26, and 28 of the Mining Industry Act is that the establishment of mining rights for other minerals buried in the same mineral deposit shall not be permitted in the case of the establishment of mining rights for certain minerals within the same mining area. The establishment of mining rights for other minerals buried in the same mineral deposit shall not be permitted unless the establishment of mining rights is revoked. A group of established mining rights shall continue to exist for the duration of the mining rights unless the establishment of mining rights is revoked, and it shall not be naturally extinguished solely on the ground that mining in the area for which the mining has been applied has no economic value. Therefore, if the tin mining right established in this case has not been lawfully revoked, it is unlawful to grant another permission for the establishment of mining rights for the same mineral as tin with the same tin.

Articles 5, 24, 26, and 28 of the Mining Industry Act

[Judgment of the court below]

The head of the Mining Registration Office

1. The grounds for appeal by the supplementary intervenor

Seoul High Court Decision 83Gu756 delivered on August 30, 1984

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below accepted the plaintiff's mining right's revised mining area's 1956.10.4, the non-party's new mining right's revised mining area's revised mining right's new mining area's revised mining right's revised mining area's 1956.4, and the above revised mining right's new mining area's revised mining right's revised mining right's revised mining right's revised mining area's new mining right's revised mining area's new mining right's revised mining area's new mining right's new mining right's revised mining area's new mining right's new mining right's revised mining right's new mining right's new mining right's revised mining right's new mining right's new mining right's revised mining right's new mining right's revised mining right's new mining right's revised mining right's new mining right's new mining right's revised mining right's new mining right's new mining right's revised mining right's new mining right's new mining right's new mining right's new mining right's new mining right'.

However, according to the Mining Industry Act, a mining right is a right to mine and acquire minerals registered in a certain mining area and other minerals buried in the same mineral deposit (see Article 5 of the Mining Industry Act), except for certain exceptions to different kinds of minerals (see Article 24 of the same Act). If the application area overlaps with a mining area of the same kind of mineral at the time of application, two or more mining rights shall not be established (see Article 24 of the same Act). In this case, non-identical minerals buried in the same mineral deposit shall be regarded as the same mineral (see Articles 26, 28 of the same Act). The above provision provides that the mining right shall not be established in the same area and non-identical minerals buried in the same mineral deposit shall be regarded as the same mineral, and if a mining right is established for certain minerals, the establishment of a mining right on the same mineral deposit shall not be established in accordance with the provisions of Articles 38 through 48 of the Mining Industry Act, and the term of the mining right shall not be deemed to be null and void as long as there exists no economic value of the establishment of a mining right.

In this case, if tin mining rights already established in the mining area of this case are not legally revoked, the mining rights shall continue to exist for the term of existence. If the defendant grants another permission for the establishment of the mining rights to the same tin together with the same tin, as stated in the judgment of the court below, the above tin and modification shall be regarded as the same kind of mineral in the same mineral deposit, and as long as tin mining rights already established exist, the establishment of the mining rights in the mining area shall be illegal as the overlapping establishment of the mining rights for the same mineral. The court below's decision that the above disposition to revoke the mining rights by the defendant is unlawful on the ground that the establishment of the mining rights is legitimate on the ground that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles or lack of reasoning as to the establishment of the mining rights. In this regard, the judgment of the court below is without merit, and the remaining grounds of appeal shall be omitted.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kang Jin-young (Presiding Justice)