A. Purport of the provision of Article 99(2) of the Livestock Industry Cooperatives Act and whether the establishment of a new association with part of the existing association area is allowed (negative)

B. Whether the above provision of "A" is unconstitutional (negative)

A. The provisions of Article 99(2) of the Livestock Industry Cooperatives Act that no more than two cooperatives of the same type can be established within the district of a union are established in the same district because there is unnecessary competition or dispute arising from the competitive business among the cooperatives within the same district. Thus, it is aimed at promoting the promotion of livestock industry and enhancing the economic and social status of members by preventing this systematically and promoting the sound growth and development of the union. Therefore, it is not prohibited that a new association cannot be established only if the district of a union completely coincides with that of an existing union, and that part of the existing district of a union is prohibited from establishing a new association.

B. Article 119(1) and (2) of the Constitution providing for the ideology of economic order and Article 123(5) of the Constitution protecting the self-help organization of farmers cannot be said to be in violation of Article 123(5) of the Constitution, since the above provision aims to prevent the harmful effects impeding the sound development of the association due to unfair competition among the associations within the same zone, and the regulation to this extent is necessary and reasonable to the extent permitted by the Constitution for the sake of social market economy order.

(a)Article 99(2)(b) of the Livestock Industry Cooperatives Act; Articles 119(1) and (2) and 123(5) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea;

Seoul High Court Decision 200Na14888 decided May 1, 200

Minister of Agriculture and Forestry

Seoul High Sea and Myun (Law Firm Kangyang, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 90Gu7960 delivered on January 17, 1992

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. The provisions of Article 99(2) of the Livestock Industry Cooperatives Act that no more than two cooperatives of the same type can be established within the same zone shall aim to promote the promotion of livestock industry and to improve the economic and social status of members by preventing it systematically and promoting the sound growth and development of the association. Therefore, the decision of the court below to the same purport is just and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles, such as the theory of lawsuit.

2. The right to adjust a cooperative district under Article 13 (2) of the Livestock Industry Cooperatives Act may be exercised by the defendant to the extent that it does not interfere with the union members' business use in a case where the change of district is deemed necessary to promote regional development and the interests of union members. According to the records of the case, the court below is just in holding that it is not necessary for the defendant to authorize the establishment of the plaintiff cooperative, which separates Leecheon-gun from the existing cooperative, and then establishes a new cooperative area. Further, even if the defendant approved five dairy cooperatives, such as Gyeongnam Dai Dai-gun, before the disposition of this case was made through the adjustment of a new cooperative area where the area overlaps with the existing cooperative area, it does not infringe the right to equality of this case, or violates the trust formed in the course of the establishment of another new cooperative. The judgment below is just and there is no error of misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, such as

3. Article 99(2) of the Livestock Industry Cooperatives Act, which provides that an association of the same type of business shall not be established more than two within the territory of the association. The purpose of preventing the harmful effects impeding the sound development of the association by unfair competition between the associations within the same zone is to ensure the order of social and market economy. The restriction to this extent is stipulated within the limit permitted by the Constitution for the sake of the order of social and market economy, and is also necessary and reasonable, and thus, it cannot be said that the above provision violates the provisions of Article 119(1) and (2) that stipulate the ideology of economic order and Article 123(5) of the Constitution that protects the self-help organization of farmers. All of

4. Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and all costs of appeal shall be assessed against the plaintiff who has lost. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice)