2017Du42149 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing Radio Wave Fees

A Industrial Complex

Representative B

Law Firm Dongdong, Attorney Choi Hyun-hee, Kim Jong-hee, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellant-appellee

1.The C radio waves Management Director;

2.The Director of the DNA Radio Waves;

3. The head of the E radio waves management office;

The defendants' litigation performers spawal, mathal, spawal, spawal, Earthal, Spawal;

Kim Treasury Kim

Defendants Law Firm Sejong, Attorney Shin Shin-young, Counsel for the defendants-appellant-appellant

Modernism, Park Jong-chul, Park Chang-chul

Busan High Court Decision 2016Nu24236 Decided March 31, 2017

2, 2020.27

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

The lower court determined that the “radio station established by the State, etc.” under Article 67(1)1 of the Radio Waves Act should be deemed to mean the “radio station established by the State, etc. at the time of imposing radio wave fees.” In light of the content and records of the relevant statutes, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the meaning of “establishment” under the Radio Waves Act, contrary

2. Regarding ground of appeal No. 2

The lower court determined that the installer of each of the instant radio stations cannot be deemed the State on the ground that the Plaintiff was an independent public corporation separate from the State, and whether it constitutes “radio station established by the State” under Article 67(1)1 of the Radio Waves Act, based on the grounds that it is determined whether the installer is in accordance with the Radio Waves Act, and that it is irrelevant to the ownership of radio station facilities. Examining the content and record of the relevant statutes, the lower court did not err in its determination by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the concept of installer under the Radio Waves Act,

3. As to the third ground for appeal

The lower court determined that, in the case of maritime and aeronautical radio stations, the installer’s name was exempted from spectrum use fees on the above radio stations in light of the fact that the authorized person’s name was the State, and thus, cannot be deemed to be inconsistent with

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the principle of equity, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

4. Conclusion

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 Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Sang-ok

Justices Ansan-chul

Justices Noh Jeong-hee

Justices Kim Jong-hwan