Whether the dumbio (sumba) room of a health club constitutes a private house or business facility equipped with a rest room under Article 22 of the Water Supply Ordinance of Seoul Metropolitan Government (negative)

This case’s main purpose is a swimming pool, which is the basic facility of a health club, and an accessory facility for the preparation, rest, atmosphere, etc. of members using a physical training club after the movement of the members. In the event that the location, function, or the actual use of the club room cannot be deemed as a studio or a studio for business purposes or a studio for its exclusive use, the above facilities do not constitute a studio or a studio business facility with general studio or a studio studio b of attached Table 22-B and 4 of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Water Supply Ordinance.

Article 22 of the Seoul Metropolitan Government Water Supply Ordinance

Supreme Court Decision 84Nu18 delivered on April 24, 1984, Supreme Court Decision 85Nu512 delivered on October 8, 1985 (dong)

Treatment Co., Ltd. and one other

Attorney Jung-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government

Seoul High Court Decision 83Gu730 delivered on May 29, 1984

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged the facts as follows. The main purpose of the above recognition is to prepare, rest, atmosphere, etc. after the movement of the members using the swimming pool and the physical training hall in Seoul Chst at the original city, and the main purpose of the above recognition is to prepare, rest, and waiting room after the movement of the members using the swimming pool and the physical training hall in Seoul at the original city, and the above facilities cannot be regarded as a rest room for private business or a rest room for its exclusive use. Thus, the above facilities do not fall under the category 2-B and 4 of the attached Table 22-B of the so-called Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy, and they cannot be seen as a rest room for private business or a rest room for private business, and the part exceeding the amount calculated by applying the rate of No. 1 of the defendant's disposition of this case in this case is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the records or in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the records.

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

Justices Jeon Soo-hee (Presiding Justice)