2014Guhap22 Revocation of the designation of an expected area for power plants

Three-party class action group of residents with the interruption of power generation and the Residents' Voting Promotion Committee

The Minister of Trade, Industry

Korea hydroelectric Power Co., Ltd.

June 24, 2014

July 29, 2014

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the costs incurred by participation.

On September 14, 2012, the defendant confirmed that the designation and public announcement of the prospective site for electric power resource development business is invalid.

1. Details of the disposition;

The following facts shall not be disputed between the parties, or may be acknowledged in Gap evidence 17 by integrating the whole purport of the pleadings:

A. Pursuant to Article 11(1) of the Electric Power Source Development Promotion Act, the Defendant: (a) designated the name of the electric power source developer as the Defendant’s auxiliary participant; (b) as the prearranged zone for the construction of a large-scale nuclear power plant; and (c) designated the name of the prearranged zone for the electric power source development business as the prearranged zone for the large-scale nuclear power source construction business; and (d) designated the land as the prearranged zone for the large-scale area for the electric power source development business as the prearranged zone for the large-scale area for the electric power source development business and publicly announced the said designation.

B. The Plaintiff is an organization organized on August 12, 2013, with the major purpose of opposing activities for the construction of major nuclear power plants, consisting of A and 11 other than A, as promoters.

2. Whether the plaintiff's standing to sue is recognized

The plaintiff himself is an organization consisting of residents in the East Sea-si and Sejong-si residing within 30 km from the prearranged zone for the construction of major nuclear power plants. The plaintiff asserts that the construction of the above nuclear power plant could infringe on fundamental constitutional rights, such as environmental rights, the right to pursue happiness, and right to life, and sought confirmation of the invalidity of the designation and announcement of this case. Accordingly, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff is not entitled to standing to sue because there is no legal interest in seeking confirmation

On the other hand, even if a third party, who is not the direct party to an administrative disposition, is not the party to the administrative disposition, if the legal interests protected by the administrative disposition are infringed by the law, the party is entitled to be judged by the legitimacy by filing an administrative litigation seeking a nullity of the administrative disposition, and the legal interests here refer to the individual, direct and specific interests protected by the laws and regulations of the pertinent disposition and the relevant laws and regulations (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2006Du330, Mar. 16, 2006). The environmental interests or fundamental rights under the Constitution alleged to be infringed by the plaintiff are attributed to natural persons under their nature, and the designation and public notice of this case does not seem to have any legal interests that are directly infringed or threatened to be infringed by the designation and public notice of this case. Accordingly, the plaintiff cannot be deemed to have standing to seek a confirmation of invalidity of the designation and public notice of this case.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as it is brought by a person who has no standing to sue, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge shall replace the judge;

Suspension of the Judge

Judges Kim Jae-sik