The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Progress of litigation;

A. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that the fact that the Defendant installed a acrylic board in the opening space of the upper structure alone does not constitute a temporary inspection, on the premise that it constitutes “a case where the captain intends to remodel or repair the hull due to a change in the main body of the vessel to affect its strength, watertightness, or fire safety” or “a case where the details stated in the fishing vessel inspection certificate are to be changed” or “a case where a change that is likely to affect the airworthiness of the fishing vessel or the maintenance of safety of human life has occurred due to a marine accident, etc.,” in order to be a temporary inspection of the vessel.

B. A prosecutor filed an appeal to determine whether the case was remanded and the prosecutor filed an appeal, and the trial before the return did not delegate the specific contents to be stated in the fishing vessel inspection certificate to a subordinate statute, and as long as the fishing vessel law does not delegate it, “total tonnage” cannot be deemed to fall under the contents to be stated in the fishing vessel inspection certificate under Article 27(1)1 of the Fishing Vessels Act, and thus, the prosecutor dismissed the prosecutor’s appeal on the ground that punishing the Defendant as a violation of the law of the fishing vessel violates the principle of statutory punishment.

(c)

In light of the legal principles on delegation of authority, the Supreme Court’s judgment of remanded the following: (a) the prosecutor filed an appeal; and (b) the provision system, form, and provision contents of the former Fishing Vessels Act (amended by Act No. 14510, Dec. 27, 2016; hereinafter “Act”) and the Enforcement Rule of the same Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries No. 244, Jun. 28, 2017; hereinafter “Enforcement Rule”) are examined in light of the legal principles on delegation of authority; (c) Articles 21(1) and 27(1)1 of the Act can be predicted by specifying the contents and scope of the matters to be delegated to the Ordinance of the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries with respect to the matters to be stated in the fishing vessel inspection certificate in detail and by specifying the contents and scope of the matters to

Article 63 (1) 1 (a) of the Enforcement Rule.