1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The court's explanation of this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing this case as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Provided, That part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be used below, and the judgment of the court of first instance in paragraph (2) shall be supplemented.

(1) The last sentence of the second sentence of the judgment of the court of the first instance shall be amended to "SD in Boli-si".

② Next, the instant electric power plant was discharged from the point of time on December 15, 2008 due to the test operation before the completion of construction, etc. in the third place below the third place of the judgment of the first instance.

(3) The phrase "in accordance with Article 14 of the former Fisheries Act" shall be deleted from three to four above the third sentence of the first instance court.

(4) The fifth and fifth written judgment of the first instance shall consist of the 10-day “Plaintiffs” in the form of “Defendants”.

(5) The sixth seven pages of the judgment of the court of first instance shall have "No. 23, 2013." "No. 13, 2013."

(6) Each "Agreement No. 1 and No. 2" of the 8th, 7, and 17th, of the judgment of the first instance shall be amended by "No. 1 and No. 2", respectively.

(7) Six (3) of the first instance judgment shall be added to “B” under the tenth (10) of the said judgment.

2. Supplement of judgment

A. In the first and second agreements, the Defendant and the instant fishermen’s representatives agreed to comply with the results of the service investigation conducted by the NAU, the investigating agency. The final report (Evidence A-2, hereinafter “third report”) submitted on January 2015 by the NAU, the NAU, which was submitted on January 2015 by the NAU, is included only on the annual average production of the instant fishing ground, and the annual average production reduction rate is not specified, and there is no dispute between the parties concerned as to the fact that “the disposition to revoke the fishery right due to K construction” is written on “non-high”.

On the other hand, according to the results of the fact-finding on the Jeonnam University Industry-Academic Cooperation Foundation of the first instance court, the Jeonnam University Industry-Academic Cooperation Foundation of the instant fishing ground.