2015Guhap5370 Revocation of Disposition of Refusal to Allocation of Emission Permits

1. ○○○ Incorporated Company

2. ○○○ Incorporated Company

3. ○○○ Incorporated Company

4. ○○○ Incorporated Company

5. ○○○ Incorporated Company

6 . ▲▲▲▲ 주식회사

7. ○○○ Stock Company

8.OOOCo.

9. ○○○ Incorporated Company

10. ○○○○○

11. ○○○ Incorporated Company

12. 000 Stock Companies

13. ○○○ Incorporated Company

14. ○○○ Incorporated Company

15. ○○○ Incorporated Company

The Minister of Trade, Industry

November 17, 2016

February 2, 2017

1 . 환경부장관이 2014 . 12 . 1 . 원고 ▲▲▲▲ 주식회사에 대하여 한 613 , 120tCO2eq 부분의 온실가스 배출권 할당 거부처분을 취소한다 .

2 . 원고 ▲▲▲▲ 주식회사를 제외한 나머지 원고들의 청구를 모두 기각한다 .

3 . 소송비용 중 원고 ▲▲▲▲ 주식회사와 피고 사이에 생긴 부분은 피고가 , 나머지 원 고들과 피고 사이에 생긴 부분은 위 원고들이 부담한다 .

On December 1, 2014, the Minister of Environment revokes both the rejection disposition of allocation of each greenhouse gas emission permit as stated in attached Table 1 against the Plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. At the State Council on November 17, 2009, the government announced that the total nationwide greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 would be reduced by 30% compared to the anticipated greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 (BAU hereinafter referred to as "BAU"). For this purpose, the Framework Act on Low Carbon, Green Growth (hereinafter referred to as the "Framework Act") was enacted on January 13, 2010.

B. On April 14, 2010, the Government announced an entity designated under Article 42(5) of the Framework Act and Article 26(2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on Low Carbon, Green Growth (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27180, May 24, 2016) (wholly amended by Act No. 2016-255, Dec. 30, 2016; hereinafter referred to as the “former Guidelines for Management”) to promote the reduction of greenhouse gases, energy conservation, and energy utilization efficiency, and publicly announced all of the designated entities that were subject to the former Guidelines for Management of Greenhouse Gases and Energy (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27180, Dec. 27, 2012).

(c) The Government has set and managed targets for reduction of greenhouse gases, energy conservation, and energy utilization efficiency for each controlled entity since 2012, subject to the target management system without setting the objective in 2011.

D. On May 14, 2012, Article 42(1)1 of the Framework Act on the Allocation and Trading of Greenhouse Gas Emission Permits (hereinafter referred to as the “Discharge Trading Scheme”) was enacted for the purpose of effectively achieving the targets of reducing greenhouse gas under Article 42(1)1 of the Framework Act (hereinafter referred to as the “State greenhouse gas reduction targets”) by utilizing market functions. The Act on Allocation and Trading of Greenhouse Gas Emission Permits (hereinafter referred to as the “Emission Trading Act”) was enacted for the purpose of introducing a system on the allocation and trading of greenhouse gas emissions allocated to an individual business entity within the scope of total emission allowances of greenhouse gases.

E. On January 28, 2014, pursuant to Article 4 of the Act on Emission Trading, the Government established a basic framework for the first commitment period (hereinafter referred to as “basic plan”) for emission trading (hereinafter referred to as “the first commitment period”) for three years from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2017, including matters concerning the domestic and overseas status of and prospects for the emissions trading system, and basic direction-setting for the operation of the emission trading system.

F. The Minister of Environment, on September 12, 2014, designated and publicly notified a business entity eligible for allocation of emission permits under Article 8 of the Emission Trading Act (hereinafter “business entity eligible for allocation”) as a business entity eligible for allocation of petroleum (the Plaintiffs were designated and publicly notified as a business entity eligible for allocation of petroleum pursuant to Article 10 of the Emission Trading Act and excluded from the subject of the target management system).

G. On September 16, 2014, the Minister of Environment publicly announced a national emission permit allocation plan (hereinafter referred to as “emission permit allocation plan”) pursuant to Article 3(8) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Allocation and Trading of Greenhouse Gas Emission Permits (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27181, May 24, 2016; hereinafter referred to as “Enforcement Decree of the former Act on the Allocation and Trading of Greenhouse Gases,” and the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Allocation and Trading of Greenhouse Gases, which is currently in force, pursuant to Article 3(8) of the same Act.

아 . 원고들은 배출권 할당신청기간인 2014 . 9 . 15 . 부터 같은 해 10 . 14 . 까지 사이에 환경부장관에게 계획기간 온실가스 배출권 할당을 신청하였고 , 환경부장관은 2014 . 12 . 1 . 별지1 표 기재와 같이 원고들에게 온실가스 배출권을 할당하였다 . 원고들은 별지1 표 신청량 기재와 같은 양의 예상 온실가스 배출량을 기준으로 배출권 할당을 신청 [ 원 고 000000 주식회사 ( 이하 ' 주식회사 ' 의 기재를 생략한다 ) 의 경우 할당신청을 한 10 , 298 , 010tCO2 - eq { 1tCO2 - eq = 1KAU ( Korean Allowance Unit ) , 이하 단위를 ' KAU ' 라 한다 ) 보다 더 많은 10 , 329 , 441KAU가 인정량으로 결정되어 그 인정량을 기준으로 한다 ] 하였음에도 별지1 표 할당량 기재와 같은 양 ( 원고 ▲▲▲▲의 경우는 2 , 539 , 362KAU ) 을 초과하는 부분에 대하여는 배출권 할당이 거부되었다 ( 이하 위와 같이 원고들의 신청량 중 할당되지 않은 부분의 처분을 ' 이 사건 처분 ' 이라 한다 ) .

자 . 한편 원고 ▲▲▲▲는 환경부장관에게 , 온산공장 EO / EG 시설이 ' 예상되는 신설 시설 ' 에 해당하여 사전할당량으로 산정되어야 한다면서 이의신청을 하였고 , 환경부장관 은 2015 . 2 . 6 . 원고 ▲▲▲▲의 이의신청 중 일부를 받아들여 원고 ▲▲▲▲에게 계획 기간 온실가스 배출권을 74 , 791KAU 추가 할당하여 원고 ▲▲▲▲의 온실가스 배출권 할당량을 총 2 , 614 , 153KAU ( = 2 , 539 , 362KAU + 74 , 791KAU ) 로 결정하였다 .

(j) On May 24, 2016, Article 6 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Emission Trading Act was amended by Presidential Decree No. 27181, and the competent authority on the instant disposition was changed to the defendant (hereinafter referred to as “Minister of Environment and the defendant”).

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 18, 19, 21, Eul evidence No. 1 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

1) Common assertion 1 - procedural defect

A) Violation of procedures under the Emission Trading Act

(1) Holding formal public hearings

When formulating the allocation plan, the Defendant shall hold a public hearing to hear the opinions of interested parties and reflect them in the allocation plan if their opinions are reasonable. As such, the Defendant should have specifically explained the major use in the allocation plan, namely, the method of determining the allocation of allocation by type of business or company, which serves as the basis for calculating the allocation of business entities eligible for allocation, and the number used in the above decision method, so that interested parties may actually present their opinions on the allocation plan. However, the Defendant did not mention at the public hearing at all, and thus, it was impossible for interested parties to present their opinions on the instant disposition.

(2) Failure to comply with any time-limit

The Act on Trading Emission Permits and the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Trading Emission Permits provide for the key procedures for the implementation of the emissions trading system, i.e., the establishment of a basic plan and allocation plan, but the defendant failed to comply with the above time limit, and as a result, the plaintiffs lost an opportunity to resist the disposition of this case.

B) Violation of procedures under the Administrative Procedures Act

(1) Violation of the duty to give prior notice

The instant disposition imposes a duty on the parties and limits the rights and interests of the parties, but the Defendant did not notify the Plaintiffs of the facts and details of the disposition in advance.

(2) Violation of the duty to present reasons for the disposition.

While the defendant refused to allocate part of the plaintiffs' greenhouse gas emission permits upon the disposition of this case, the defendant did not present the grounds and reasons for such refusal.

2) Common assertion 2 - Real defect

The Act on Emission and Trading of Greenhouse Gases grants the Defendant the authority to allocate greenhouse gas emission permits, but clearly presents its procedures and standards. However, the Defendant violated the above criteria, and thus, the instant disposition was unlawful as it was in violation of superior statutes or in violation of the principle of equity, thereby deviating from and abusing discretionary power.

A) The illegality of the use of the national emission outlook standard in 2009

The Defendant used a national greenhouse gas emission forecast value calculated by the government at the time of the instant disposition (hereinafter “State BAU”) in 2009, but the State BAU in 2009 was calculated based on the data before five years from the time of the instant disposition, and it is inappropriate to use it for the allocation of emission permit under the bAU in 2015, which was implemented in 2015.

B) Estimated growth rate of the petroleum chemical industry

After determining allocation by type of business, the Defendant decided allocation by type of petroleum chemical industry on the basis of the amount of greenhouse gas emissions from the base year without considering the expected growth rate of the petroleum chemical industry at all. This is against the law of emission trading and the principle of equity.

C) Application of objectively impossible reduction rates by type of business;

On the basis of reflecting the reduction rate of the petroleum chemical business type as stipulated in the Rod Road Map for achieving the national greenhouse gas reduction target (hereinafter referred to as the "Rod Road Map"), which was prepared on January 1, 2014 by the Defendant jointly with relevant ministries, on the basis that the reduction rate of the petroleum chemical business type as stipulated in the Rod Road Map for achieving the goal of national greenhouse gas reduction is reflected in the distribution right allocation plan, and the reduction rate of the petroleum chemical business type is no longer capable of any more reduction than the global level. Therefore, it is unreasonable to consider the reduction rate of the petroleum chemical business type.

D) Non-conformity with which it is applied without recognizing the exception to the allocation guidelines.

(1) The Defendant calculated the annual average amount of greenhouse gas emissions in the base year in accordance with the criteria for allocation under the former Guidelines on the Allocation, Adjustment, and Revocation of Greenhouse Gas Emission (amended by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Environment No. 2016 - 100, Jun. 8, 2016; hereinafter referred to as the “former Guidelines”) based on the past performance-based emission quantity of the facility continuing within the base year in the base year, and did not consider any exception to the calculation method. As such, it appears to be based on such calculation method, if the time when the greenhouse gas emissions decreased due to regular repair of the facility is included in the base year, the normal emission pattern is pattern.

Despite that it is not, there is a problem that the estimated greenhouse gas emissions for the commitment period are calculated based on these standards.

(2) In the case of a petroleum chemical industry that falls under a large-scale device industry, there is no way to extend the "large-scale expansion" under the former Allocation Guidelines except for the method of conducting large-scale expansion. In particular, even if high-efficiency reduction facilities are introduced, it is virtually impossible to recognize it as facilities to be enlarged from the petroleum chemical industry.

(3) Under the previous target management system, the Plaintiffs have reported indirect emission to each workplace without separately reporting indirect emission by each facility. However, while amending the former Allocation Guidelines so that indirect emission quantity can also be reported separately as well as direct emission quantity, the Plaintiffs were required to calculate the estimated greenhouse gas emission quantity of a facility using a private type of electricity not reported separately from the former Allocation Guidelines (attached Table 1-1-5) based only on the greenhouse gas emission quantity in the last year of the relevant facility year. If the Plaintiffs were to know of the change in the system, a device was installed for reporting indirect emission separation in advance, and even if they did not sufficiently hear the explanation from the Defendant, the Plaintiffs suffered infringement of property rights that could not be fully allocated greenhouse gas emission due to the change in the method of calculating indirect emission quantity.

(4) The Defendant calculated the anticipated greenhouse gas emissions expected to be newly established and expanded facilities in advance, and, if so, the adjustment factors applied to the calculation of allocation by company in the case of petroleum chemical business type in which the facilities are expected to be newly established and expanded are excessively lowered. The anticipated greenhouse gas emissions of the above facilities should have been calculated by an additional allocation method, not by prior allocation.

3) Plaintiff ○○○○ proper assertion

A) Violation of the duty to present the reason for the disposition

Of the instant disposition, with respect to Plaintiff ○○○, the Defendant did not properly inform the grounds and purport of the refusal disposition regarding part of the amount of greenhouse gas emission permits for which the Defendant would have applied. As such, Plaintiff ○○○ was unable to properly cope with the instant disposition in the administrative remedy procedure.

B) Non-approval of the extension of indirect emission facilities among the NCC facilities

On April 2012, Plaintiff ○○○○ (hereinafter “○○○”) extended the design capacity of the instant NCC facilities by adding a physical device to the NCC facilities that both fixed discharge, fair distribution, and indirect discharge. Accordingly, the design capacity of the instant NCC facilities increased by 86% on December 32, 201, and the volume of greenhouse gas emissions, namely, the volume of indirect distribution facilities, increased by 35.2% (or 40%). Accordingly, the indirect emission facilities of the instant NCC facilities are recognized as “facilities extended during the base year,” but the Defendant did not recognize it.

(C) the expected establishment and extension of small and medium-sized establishments;

Although the plaintiff ○○○'s plan for the new construction and extension of facilities was submitted to the defendant, there was an error of law that the defendant does not recognize it as "a prospective new construction and extension facility".

4 ) 원고 ▲▲▲▲ 고유의 주장

원고 ▲▲▲▲는 2014 . 12 . 경 EO / EG 시설 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 EO / EG 시설 ' 이라 한 다 ) 을 신설하였고 , 이 사건 EO / EG 시설의 가동을 위한 스팀 추가 공급을 위해 기존시 설인 일반 보일러 시설 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 보일러 시설 ' 이라 한다 ) 의 온실가스 배출량이 증 가되었다 . 피고는 이 사건 보일러 시설의 배출량 증가는 가동률 증가에 불과할 뿐 이 사건 EO / EG 시설의 배출량 증가가 아니라고 보아 이 사건 EO / EG 시설 가동을 위한 추가 스팀 사용분에 상응하는 배출권 할당을 인정하지 않았다 . 이 사건 EO / EG 시설의 신설에 따라 이 사건 보일러 시설의 스팀 추가 사용분에 상응하는 배출량 발생은 당연 히 예정될 수밖에 없어 이를 이 사건 보일러 시설의 ' 증설 ' 로 보아야 할 것이다 . 이를 증설로 인정하지 않는 것은 배출권거래법 , 구 할당지침을 위반하거나 , 비례의 원칙에 어긋나는 것으로 위법하다 .

(b) Relevant statutes;

Attached Form 2 is as shown in the relevant statutes.

C. Legal nature of the instant disposition

1) An administrative disposition is classified into a beneficial administrative disposition and a sed administrative disposition according to its effect on the other party. The criteria for determining illegality in its procedure and substance may vary according to the aforementioned classification. As such, determination as to whether an emission permit allocation disposition is a beneficial administrative disposition or an sedi administrative disposition should be prior to the determination as to whether it is a sedi administrative disposition or whether it is an sedi administrative disposition in the procedure of the instant disposition.

2) It is reasonable to view that the allocation of emission permits is a kind of beneficial administrative disposition that establishes the rights of the Plaintiffs and grants benefits to the Plaintiffs rather than an indivative administrative disposition that restricts the Plaintiffs’ rights or imposes obligations on the Plaintiffs. The main grounds are as follows. Accordingly, the instant disposition is a rejection disposition against the application of beneficial administrative disposition.

① Article 35(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea provides that “All citizens shall have the right to live in a healthy and pleasant environment, and the State and citizens shall endeavor to preserve the environment.” Article 7 of the Framework Act on Environmental Policy provides that “Any person who causes environmental pollution or environmental damage due to his/her own act or business activity shall be liable to prevent such pollution or damage and to recover and restore the polluted or damaged environment, as well as to bear the expenses to be incurred in restoring the damage caused by environmental pollution or environmental damage.” In light of the purport of the aforementioned provision, a person who discharges greenhouse gases and causes the environment shall be liable to recover and restore the polluted or damaged environment at his/her own expense.

(2) Under the emissions trading system, the competent authority shall allocate greenhouse gas emission permits to an enterprise subject to allocation with or without consideration pursuant to Article 12 (3) of the Emission Trading Act, and a business entity eligible for allocation shall only be subject to the imposition of a penalty surcharge if it discharges more greenhouse gases than emission permits allocated pursuant to Article 33 (1) of the Emission Zone Act, and shall not be subject to any sanctions against greenhouse gas emission activities within the scope of allocated emission permits. Therefore, from the standpoint of a business entity eligible for allocation, a business entity eligible for allocation may enjoy the effect that it is fully exempted from the responsibility to recover and restore the polluted or damaged environment or is exempt from the liability equivalent to the cost of restoring and restoring money after deducting the cost of allocation from the cost of restoring and restoring the emission permits.

③ Since the industrial revolution, even if an industry recognizes it as a natural right to emit greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide generated in the course of production into the atmosphere, it is difficult to view the industry’s emission of greenhouse gases as a matter of course to be recognized by the Constitution or the law as an emission trading system, today’s greenhouse gases are objectively proven to promote and facilitate global warming and are in force. In this case, it is not because the Plaintiff’s burden of the obligation under the law on emission trading, etc. is not due to the fact that emission permits were allocated, but because the Plaintiff was designated as an allocated company as a consequence of the enactment of the Emission Trading Act.

④ The instant disposition is not an administrative disposition that is conducted on the premise of an application filed by a business entity eligible for allocation, such as the Plaintiff, and the Defendant is not an administrative disposition that can unilaterally impose on the business entity eligible for allocation without a request from the business entity eligible

D. Whether the procedure of the instant disposition is unlawful

1) Whether the procedure was unlawful due to a formal public hearing

Article 5 (4) of the Emission Trading Act, when formulating or amending an allocation plan, the Government shall hold a public hearing of the United States and hear the opinions of interested parties, and the opinions presented at the public hearing.

If it is deemed reasonable, it shall be reflected in the allocation plan.

(5) The Government is reasonable to deem that the following circumstances are met: ① The allocation plan (not inside) is prepared for a long period of 20 persons, such as experts, civic groups, persons related to research institutes, etc.; ② The Ministry of Environment, as its head office, has formulated an emission permits allocation plan (not inside) on May 29, 2014 to gather opinions from interested parties, including industry, etc. on the 4th anniversary of the total number of emission permits; ② The Government is reasonable to hold a public hearing on June 2, 2013 to establish a 1st emission permits allocation plan; ② The Government is required to provide 4th emission permits installation of a 7th emission permits allocation plan based on the opinions of interested parties at the 0th emission permits installation of the 1st emission permits installation of the 1st emission permits installation of the 1st emission permits installation of the 1st emission permits installation of the 1st emission permits installation of the 2nd emission permits installation of the 2nd emission permits installation of the 2nd emission permits installation plan.

Therefore, the above public hearing was formally and practically deprived of the opportunity to present opinions. This part of the plaintiffs' assertion to this purport is without merit.

2) Whether the procedure due to non-compliance is unlawful

Article 2(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Emission Trading Act provides that the Minister of Strategy and Finance shall establish a basic plan for emission trading by one year prior to the beginning of each commitment period (the December 31, 2013). Article 5(1) of the Emission Trading Act provides that the Government shall establish a national emission permit allocation plan by six months prior to the beginning of each commitment period (the June 30, 2014). Article 8(1) of the Emission Trading Act provides that the Defendant shall designate and publicly notify a business entity eligible for allocation which is not a business entity eligible for allocation by five months prior to the beginning of each commitment period (the July 31, 2014), and Article 17(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Emission Trading Act provides that the business entity eligible for allocation shall notify the business entity eligible for allocation by two months prior to the beginning of each commitment period (the date of October 31, 2014).

However, the government or the defendant set the time limit stipulated in each of the above provisions, the basic plan for the emissions trading system is to be established on January 28, 2014, the establishment of the emission permits allocation plan is to be made on September 11, 2014, the designation and notification of a business entity eligible for allocation is to be made on September 12, 2014, the notification of the allocation of emission permits is to be made on December 1, 2014, and the fact that the notification of the allocation of emission permits is completed on December 1, 2014 is to be made respectively, or there is no dispute between the parties.

However, there is no provision regarding the legal effect in the case of failure to comply with the time limit under the above provisions, as well as the provision that the purport of setting the time limit for each of the above procedures should be implemented as soon as possible in accordance with the introduction of the right to trade in emission. Accordingly, each of the above provisions is merely merely a decoration provision, but cannot be viewed as a mandatory provision or an effective provision.

In addition, as seen earlier, the Government and the Defendant collected opinions from industry, etc. for at least eight months after the establishment of the basic plan and reflected such opinions in the allocation plan of emission permits. It is difficult to view that the instant disposition should be revoked as unlawful solely on the ground that it failed to comply with the deadline in a series of procedures that led to the instant disposition.

Therefore, this part of the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

3) Whether a prior notification obligation is violated

As seen earlier, the beneficial disposition of this case is a rejection disposition against an application for an administrative disposition, and is not a disposition that restricts the rights and interests of the other party or imposes an obligation on the other party, and thus, it does not impose an obligation to notify the Plaintiffs in advance of the facts and uses in relation to the disposition to be taken in accordance with Article 21(1) of the Administrative Procedures Act.

This part of the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

4) Whether the grounds for the disposition are violated

Article 23(1) of the Administrative Procedures Act provides that an administrative agency shall provide the basis and reasons for the disposition to the relevant party when rendering a disposition. This purport is to exclude the arbitrary decision of the administrative agency and to enable the relevant party to properly cope with the administrative remedy procedure. Therefore, if the relevant party sufficiently knows whether the disposition was made due to such grounds and reasons, and it does not interfere with the party’s appeal procedure, the disposition cannot be deemed unlawful unless the grounds and reasons for the disposition are specified in the written disposition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Du2024, Sept. 10, 2015). In addition, in a case where a party’s disposition rejecting an application with the relevant provision specifying grounds for rejection, etc. presented reasons to the extent that the relevant party becomes aware of the grounds and grounds for the disposition, the relevant disposition cannot be deemed unlawful even if it did not provide the grounds and grounds for the disposition with specific provisions and grounds, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Du880, Feb. 27, 2008).

In light of the above facts, Gap's evidence Nos. 5, 6, 18, 19, 21, Eul's evidence Nos. 1, 6, 13, 14, 36, and 40 (including each number) and the overall purport of oral argument, the following circumstances, i.e., ① the disposition of this case was made by preparing an application for allocation of emission permits in accordance with [Attachment No. 6] prescribed in Article 5 (1) of the former Guidelines and submitting it to the defendant. ② The above application for allocation contains provisions on the grounds for the above application, ② Article 13 (1) of the Emission Trading Act, Article 15 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act, ③ since the government or the defendant at the time of the introduction of the emission trading system were held several times, it appears that the defendant violated the above provision on the allocation of emission permits, ③ The above provision on the allocation of emission permits at the time of submission of 20th emission permits guidelines and 4th emission permits.

Therefore, this part of the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

E. Whether the instant disposition is unlawful in light of the illegality of the emission permit allocation plan

1) Arrangement of the plaintiffs' claims

The Ministry of Environment shall calculate the total permissible volume of emissions of the State on the basis of the State BAU in 2009 and determine the greenhouse gas emissions by sector and by sector of each compliance year in consideration of the reduction rate by sector of the commitment period, as seen earlier or as stated in the evidence Nos. 1-1 and 2.

According to the above facts, the part of the plaintiffs' assertion on the illegality of the use of the national emission forecast standard in 2009 [the above paragraph (A) 2-A], and the part of the part of the estimated growth rate of the petroleum chemical industry [the above paragraph (a) 2-B] and the part of the application of the reduction rate by industry which is objectively impossible [the above paragraph (a)-2-C)] and the part of the application of the reduction rate by industry which is objectively impossible [the above paragraph (a)-2-C] can be deemed to be about the illegality of the plan for allocation of emission rights rather than about the defendant's own illegality of the allocation disposition by company.

Therefore, we examine whether the disposition of this case can be revoked on the ground of illegality of the emission permit allocation plan as alleged by the plaintiffs.

2) Succession to defects

In a case where a series of procedures are conducted in a series of stages in order to achieve the same administrative purpose and a subsequent disposition causes a legal effect, if the prior disposition causes a single legal effect by combining each other, the prior disposition cannot be deemed an invalidation disposition because the defect is not significant and obvious, and even if the prior disposition is not an invalidation disposition due to an administrative litigation, and there is no defect in the subsequent disposition itself, the subsequent disposition, which is conducted under the premise of the prior disposition, may be deemed an illegal disposition, such as the prior disposition, and may be filed for revocation by an appeal (see Supreme Court Decision 92-4567 delivered on February 9, 193, etc.).

In light of the fact that the Act was enacted to effectively achieve national greenhouse gas reduction targets by introducing a system for trading greenhouse gas emission permits in accordance with Article 46 of the Framework Act, the purpose of which is to achieve the State's targets by using market skills, the allocation method of emission permits is divided into the State's total emission allowances for each sector and each business sector, and the State's total emission allowances are determined within such scope, and the allocation plan for each business sector is specifically determined according to the allocation plan of emission permits, and the Defendant determined allocation for each business sector within the same type as the disposition in this case within the scope of the allocation of emission permits, it is reasonable to deem that the instant disposition causes the occurrence on the premise of the allocation plan of emission permits, which is combined with the allocation plan of emission permits and the instant disposition in this case to enable each business entity to gratuitously emission greenhouse gases within the scope of emission permits allocated for national greenhouse gas reduction targets.

Therefore, if a defect is acknowledged in the emission permit allocation plan itself, the defect can be succeeded to the disposition in this case and the disposition in this case can also be illegal. Accordingly, we examine whether there is any defect in the emission permit allocation plan below.

3) Whether there is any defect in the emission permit allocation plan

A) Relevant legal principles

The allocation plan of emission permits is a kind of administrative plan that is established on the basis of the professional and technical judgment regarding administration in order to achieve a specific administrative objective in the future by integrating and coordinating related administrative means in order to realize a certain order at a certain point in the future. The relevant laws and regulations, such as Article 5 of the Emission Trading Act, include a general provision on the resignation for the formulation of the State’s emission permits allocation plan, and do not have any specific provision. As such, the Defendant has a relatively broad freedom of formation in drafting and determining a specific emission permits allocation plan, as in the case of general administrative plans, as in the case of general administrative plans. However, the Defendant’s freedom of formation is not unlimited, but is not limited to a legitimate comparison of the interests of the persons related to the administrative plan, as well as between public and private interests, and thus, it is unlawful if the administrative body fails to carry out the profit balancing at all or omits to include the matters to be considered in the profit balancing, or where it lacks legitimacy and objectivity.

B) Determination as to whether there was a defect due to the use of the national emission outlook standard in 2009

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the respective descriptions and the entire purport of the evidence Nos. 1, 9, 10, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23 (including each number) of the above facts, the Defendant’s determination of the State BAU in 2009 to be used as the basis for calculating the total permissible amount of emission in the emission permits allocation plan is difficult to deem that: (a) the Defendant did not pay any profit or did not include any matters to be included in the items subject to consideration of the total amount of emission allowances; or (b) did not lack legitimacy and objectivity despite having imposed any benefit.

① In 2009, the State BAU established and established a review committee comprised of seven members, including Vice-Chairpersons of UN IPCC (Inland, Environment, and Economic Council on Climate Change) on July 2009, based on the results of the analysis of a research team consisting of a research team consisting of the National Library that was a direct agency under the direct control of the President at the time of the time, based on the results of the analysis conducted by the research team consisting of a government-invested research institute. A public hearing and a meeting held on 44 occasions from August 2009 to the next month, a public hearing and a meeting held on 30 occasions from the next month, the related ministries’ consultation between the State Council, and the State Council, etc.

② As the Government submitted to UN on March 2012, 201, the State report to the third citizen under UN FCCC (U.S. Framework Convention on Climate Change), and the first renewal of the Republic of Korea’s shooting in accordance with UNFCCC on December 2014, the 2009 State BAU was recorded, so there was a need to maintain international trust by taking advantage of the State BAU in 2009, barring any special circumstances.

③ It is true that a lower level of greenhouse gas emissions expected from 2010 to 2014 under the State BAU recorded the same period of time. However, all of these differences do not exceed 5%. In addition, the difference is merely 3.6% of the estimated greenhouse gas emissions expected in 2020 in accordance with the State BAU, 2009, claiming that the Plaintiffs should be the basis for calculating the instant disposition. In addition, the difference between the estimated greenhouse gas emissions expected in 2020 in accordance with the State BAU, 2009, which was calculated in 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the “State BAU”), and those expected in accordance with the State BU, 209.

④ In the case of a petroleum chemical industry to which the Plaintiffs belong, the allocation of emission permits for the commitment period to which the State BAU was applied in 2009 is KRU on 7 million 143. On the other hand, the allocation of emission permits during the same period to which the State BAU was applied in 2013 is KRU on 141.0 million, and it is difficult to readily conclude that the application of the State BAU in 2009 is disadvantageous or unreasonable to the Plaintiffs, such as the Plaintiffs’ head.

⑤ Since the BAU’s decision itself is a policy decision, it does not necessarily require that the State’s BAU should be modified solely on the basis that the actual volume of emissions increases above the estimated value pursuant to the State BAU.

C) Determination as to the existence of defects due to the anticipated growth rate of the petroleum chemical industry

The allocation plan of emission permits is to allocate national ETS BAU by the ratio of the applicable emission volume to the national BAU by the ratio of the emission volume to the applicable emission volume, and to calculate the ETS BAU by type of business, i.e., the ETS BAU by type of business, while calculating the emission volume by type of business, the ratio of the emission volume by type of business from 2011 to 2013 to the average value of the emission volume by type of business for three years in the base year from 2013, which is not reflected in the anticipated growth ratio of the business type of emission prospects by type of business.

However, in full view of the following circumstances recognized as above, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant reflected the expected growth rate of the petroleum chemical industry in calculating the net gas emission outlook of the petroleum chemical industry in the emission permits allocation plan.

(1) Since ordinary greenhouse gas emissions increase or decrease in proportion to the operating rate of facilities or production, if it appears in the category of business, which appears to increase greenhouse gas emissions during a certain period of the past in one type of business, due to the increase or decrease of greenhouse gas emissions in proportion to the rate of operation or production of facilities, and it appears that greenhouse gas emissions are reduced during a certain period of the past, it may be determined as the type of

② As above, it is reasonable to predict that this growth rate will belong to a certain period of time in the future, considering the change in greenhouse gas emissions (i.e., ‘x axis' in this ‘the year' and ‘y axis' in this ‘emitting quantity') during a certain period of time.

③ In the foregoing manner, the Defendant calculated the expected greenhouse gas emissions for each compliance year of the commitment year by reflecting the fluctuation in greenhouse gases for three years in the base year, considering the average emission volume of greenhouse gases by three years in the base year as the starting point for calculating the anticipated emission volume of greenhouse gases.

④ The estimated amount of greenhouse gas emissions between the planning periods of a petroleum chemical business type, which has continuously increased greenhouse gas emissions in the base year, was calculated and reflected in the year 2015, 55 million KU in the commitment period, 56.3 million KU in the year 2016, 57.1 million 57 in the year 2017. On the other hand, in the case of the place where the volume of greenhouse gas emissions continuously decreased in the base year, the estimated amount of greenhouse gas emissions is calculated and reflected in the calculation that the expected amount of greenhouse gas emissions continuously decreased as the commitment period expires in the case of the timber business type.

⑤ Based on the prospect of pure growth rate, in the policy determination on the following: (a) the possibility of causing disputes between the types of business is high due to the increase of factors to be verified when considering the expected growth rate by type of business based on the prospect of pure growth rate; and (b) the possibility of facilitating verification when using the changed emission volume in the past; (c) the Defendant appears to have calculated the anticipated growth rate by type of business based on the changed emission volume, not on the prospect of pure growth rate; and (d) the Defendant appears to have undergone the process of comprehensively gathering opinions from relevant experts before determining the aforementioned method.

D) Determination as to whether there is a defect in applying the reduction rate by type of business;

In full view of the following circumstances recognized by the aforementioned evidence and the purport of the entire argument, the Defendant’s determination of the greenhouse gas reduction rate of the period of the petroleum chemical sector in the emission permit allocation plan as 2.8% (2015), 3.6% (2016), and 4.6% (2017), etc. of a certain amount of petroleum chemical industry is not reflected in the level of the reduced technology of the petroleum chemical industry in the plan to allocate emission permits. Furthermore, it is difficult to view that the Defendant failed to implement the profit balancing at all, or omitted the matters to be included in the subject to consideration of the profit balancing, or omitted or imposed the profits, but lack legitimacy and objectivity.

① “Reduction rate by type of business” in the emission permits allocation plan is accepted as is the draft determined in the road map, and “Reduction rate by type of business” in the road map is determined by the government, which is established jointly under the jurisdiction of the Office for Government Policy Coordination, the National Policy Coordination Committee, the Joint Working Group Operation Meeting of the relevant ministries and agencies (including external review meetings, etc.) held over 13 times from May 2013 to May, 17, 2014, and the opinion gathering at briefing sessions, etc. held against industry, NGO, etc., and the deliberation of the Green Growth Committee, reporting to the State Council, etc.

② The calculation of the reduction rate of greenhouse gas for the period of the petroleum chemical industry is based on the progressive increase of the reduction rate of the petroleum chemical industry from the Round road map to 7.5% by 2020. Furthermore, from the Round road map to 7.5% by 2020, the basis for considering the reduction rate of the petroleum chemical industry to 7.5% by 2020 is as follows: (a) as a result of sufficiently gathering opinions, it is possible to reduce 2.7% by improving the efficiency of common equipment of the petroleum chemical industry; (b) heavy oil can be reduced by 2.7% by improving the efficiency of the petroleum chemical industry; and (c) calculating the reduction rate accordingly, such as 1.1% by replacing the petroleum gas to LNG; and (d) that the reduction rate of 2% by 0.2% by means of biomass.

③ Since the aforementioned reduced technology is merely an example of the reduced technology presented by the Defendant in a reasonable standard, even if some or all of the above reduced technology is reflected in the petroleum chemical industry, it cannot be deemed that there was an error in calculating the reduction rate for this reason. In other words, as the scientific technology at the time of determining a plan for allocation of the right to use the reduced technology or road map, the method for calculating the reduction rate of the petroleum chemical industry is diverse, the technology that can reduce greenhouse gases from the petroleum chemical industry is limited to the reduced technology set out in the road map, because it can not be limited to the technology that can reduce greenhouse gases from the petroleum chemical industry.

④ The petroleum chemical industry is a type of business that requires conversion of the final energy consumption to a low carbon and industrial structure as a representative greenhouse gas emissions industry with 28.6% compared to the volume of industry 45.9% compared to the volume of the country’s total. Such social needs are 16.2% of the total national reduction rate as of 2017, and the average reduction rate in industry is determined as 11.6% as of November 6% of the average reduction rate in industry. The same period of petroleum chemical industry is determined as 4.6% from the standpoint of the petroleum chemical industry [in light of the estimated greenhouse gas emissions in 2017, petroleum chemical industry accounts for 2% of the total country BAU-7.8% of the total national emission quantity, but its proportion was high in the number of petroleum emission permits in the past 9.8% of the total amount of petroleum emission permits in the year 2017.

⑤ When determining the allocation plan of emission permits, the Defendant actively reflected the opinions of interested parties, etc. regarding the reduction rate, and actively applied the reduction rate of 10% to all types of business, and strengthened rationality in calculating the reduction rate by applying the reduction rate of 80% to the areas of indirect discharge with a relative burden.

E) Sub-determination

Therefore, this part of the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

F. Whether the instant disposition is unlawful in terms of the problems in the application of the allocation guidelines

1) Legal nature of the former Guidelines for Allocation

The Defendant calculated the anticipated amount of greenhouse gas emissions expected for the commitment period of the Plaintiffs on the basis of Article 10(1) and [Attachment 1] of the former Allocation Guidelines (hereinafter referred to as “the calculation method provision of this case”) based on Article 10(1) and [Attachment 1] of the former Allocation Guidelines and Article 10(1) [Attachment 1] of the former Allocation Guidelines. Therefore, prior to determining the illegality of the dispositions of this case on the grounds of illegality of the former Allocation Guidelines, the legal nature of the calculation method provision of this case

The so-called administrative rules, which are issued by a superior administrative agency to a subordinate administrative agency on the basis of the administrative guidelines or the interpretation and application of statutes, are generally effective only within the administrative organization and do not have external binding force. However, if the provisions of statutes give the authority to determine the specific matters of the statutes to a specific administrative agency, and the delegated administrative agency specifically provides for the matters that are the contents of the statutes in the form of administrative rules in which the administrative agency does not specify the specific matters of the statutes, such administrative rules are not a general effect with the above administrative rules, but a general effect with the authority to supplement the specific matters of the statutes. Accordingly, such administrative rules have the function to supplement the contents of the statutes in accordance with the legal provisions that grant the administrative agency the authority to supplement the specific matters of the statutes (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Du3742, Mar. 27, 2008).

The main sentence of Article 12 (1) of the Act on Trading Emission Permits shall be prescribed by the competent authority for each commitment period to allocate total emission permits and annual emission permits to business entities eligible for allocation in accordance with the allocation plan; (2) the criteria for allocation of emission permits under paragraph (1) shall be as follows; (3) the results of the submission of emission permits by business entities eligible for allocation under Article 15 (2) (No. 2); (4) the degree of development of emission permits by business entities eligible for allocation (No. 4); (6) the degree of development of emission permits by business entities eligible for allocation in accordance with the provisions of Article 42 (6) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emission Permits, taking into account the degree of development of emission permits by sector or by business entity eligible for allocation (no. 5); (6) the rate of development of emission permits by sector (no. 7); and (4) the outcomes of development of emission permits by sector or by investment in facilities of business entities eligible for allocation, etc. under Article 42 (6) of the Framework Act:

Article 10(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Emission Trading Act provides for the methods and procedures for calculating allocation of emission permits under Chapter IV, Articles 8 through 15 of the same Act. Among them, working groups by sector shall also provide for allocation plans, matters provided for in each subparagraph of Article 12(2) of the Act on Trading of Emission Permits, and the criteria provided for in each subparagraph of Article 12(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on Trading of Emission Permits, i.e., the estimated amount of greenhouse gases emitted from the existing facilities in the base year (Article 12(1)1), and the method of calculating the estimated amount of greenhouse gases emitted from the existing facilities in the pertinent compliance year by examining the application form for allocation, specifications, and evidentiary materials of the anticipated amount of greenhouse gases emitted from each business entity belonging to the pertinent sector, based on the estimated amount of greenhouse gases emitted from each business entity subject to allocation of emission permits, and the detailed method of calculation [Attachment 1] of the allocation of greenhouse gases generated from each business entity subject to allocation of greenhouse gases in the pertinent compliance year.

In full view of the contents, form, purport, etc. of the pertinent laws and regulations, the determination of the calculation method of the instant case is prescribed by Article 12(1) and (2) of the Emission Trading Act, and Article 12(1) and (2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Emission Trading Act as to the method of calculating the allocation of each company according to delegation. The provision of the instant calculation method is merely a specific provision of the calculation method of the allocation of each company among the scope delegated by the said laws and regulations, and it does not exceed the upper limit delegated by the superior laws and regulations. Thus, the instant calculation method is effective as an order of laws and regulations binding externally, combined with each of the above laws and regulations.

Therefore, the defendant allocated emission permits to the plaintiffs on the basis of the estimated greenhouse gas emissions in the limit period calculated in accordance with the calculation method of this case with external binding force, and since this provision is not unconstitutional and unlawful, it is so long as the result of the allocation of greenhouse gas emission permits by applying this provision does not deviate from the defendant's discretionary scope, the disposition of this case is lawful.

Of the allegations on the substantive defect of the disposition of this case, the part that automatically changed the calculation method of indirect discharge in the calculation method of this case constitutes the retroactive application can be seen as disputing the unconstitutionality of the provision corresponding to the provision of the calculation method of this case, and the remaining part can be seen as disputing the grounds for deviation and abuse of discretionary power. Thus, the following division is to be determined.

2) Whether some of the instant calculation method provisions violates the prohibition of retroactive legislation

As part of the calculation method of this case, Article 10 (1) of the former Guidelines for Allocation [Attached Table 1]

The Defendant calculated the anticipated actual gas emission amount due to indirect discharge of the Plaintiffs by applying the provisions of separation facilities of this case among the provisions of this case’s electric power use facilities, on the grounds that the Plaintiffs reported that the Plaintiffs had been supplied with electric power by the Korea Electric Power Corporation and did not separate them by emission facilities within the standard Do.

The provision on electric power use facilities of this case or the provision on separation facilities of this case cannot be deemed as a retroactive legislation that infringes on the plaintiffs' property rights, and it is difficult to deem otherwise unconstitutional or unlawful. The main grounds are as follows.

(1) The overall operation of the target management system under the former Guidelines for the Management of Emission Trading System is as seen earlier. The former Guidelines for the Management of Objectives [Attachment 16] of the former Guidelines for the Management of Objectives [Attachment 16] shall set the scope of the calculation and reporting of indirect emission according to the uses of electricity supplied outside for electricity companies for the purpose of electricity companies outside 37. (hereinafter referred to as "the relevant Regulations" in the former Guidelines for the Management of Objectives] at a place of business, not for a unit of emission facilities.

However, in the case of emission facilities with other power meters attached, it was defined that each emission facility can separately report the amount of electricity used.

② As above, the reason why the pertinent provision can be calculated and reported in a workplace unit is that the majority of the companies have concluded an electric power use contract with the Korea Electric Power Corporation and received a notice as a unit of workplace, and that it is possible for the companies to additionally bear the burden of expenses to attach the electric power system individually for all facilities for separate reports. Therefore, whether to separately attach the electric power system and to separately calculate and report the indirect discharge amount depends on the company’s choice, and under the target management system, there was no obligation to jointly calculate and report the indirect discharge amount without separating the indirect discharge amount to the companies.

③ As can be seen, there is no legal interest or legitimate expectation right regarding the fact that an enterprise that uses electricity supplied outside, such as the Plaintiffs, should not separate greenhouse gas emissions into a facility unit and make an integrated report on greenhouse gas emissions into a workplace unit, and that such integrated report will also be filed in the emissions trading system implemented thereafter. Therefore, there is no room for a problem of retroactive legislation, such as deprivation of an individual’s legal status already formed under the existing law through post legislation, due to the application of the snow provision in the use of the instant power, in particular the application of the separation facility provision applied to the Plaintiffs.

④ The former Allocation Guidelines separately determines the method of calculating greenhouse gas emissions expected for the compliance year by dividing the type of electric power facilities into those installed in a place of business to be separated and reported, and separately determines the method of calculating greenhouse gas emissions expected for the compliance year, depending on the greenhouse gas emissions expected in the last year of the year of the base year of the pertinent facility by applying the rules on the instant electric power use facilities. This is to ensure the calculation of greenhouse gas emissions anticipated on the basis of the greenhouse gas emissions expected in the base year of the relevant facility, by applying the rules on the facilities using electricity in the instant case where a separate report is not filed. This is to ensure that all kinds of electric use facilities are connected to a single power meter, making it impossible to measure the quantity of electric consumption by emission facilities, such as new installation, extension, closure, and replacement of emission facilities connected to a single electric meter during the base year, and such matters are finally reflected in the last year of the base year. Accordingly, the instant provision applicable to the Plaintiffs is reasonable in full view of the problems that are difficult to ascertain the direct correlation between the

Ultimately, this part of the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

3) Whether the instant disposition is deviates from or abused by discretionary power

In full view of the following circumstances, the aforementioned facts of recognition cannot be seen as unlawful in light of the overall purport of the evidence and arguments as seen earlier. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs’ assertion on this part is without merit.

① The Defendant’s calculation of greenhouse gas emissions during the commitment period of the Plaintiffs based on the amount of greenhouse gas emissions for three years in the base year cannot be deemed unfair.

1. The No. 1 of the No. 1 of the No. 1 of the No. 1 of the No. 1 of the No. 2018, the amount of the industrial activities of the No. 1 of the No. 2010, the No. 1 of the No. 2010, the amount of the industrial activities of the No. 1 of the No. 2010, the amount of the No. 1 of the No. 2010, the amount of the No. 1 of the No. 2010, the amount of the No. 1 of the No. 2010, the amount of the No. 201, the amount of the No. 2010, the amount of the No. 2010, the amount of the No. 2010, the amount of the No. 201, the amount of the No. 2010, the amount of the No. 2010, the amount of the No. 2010. 3.

In light of the period required to prepare and determine a plan for allocation of emission permits, the required period until completion of the procedure for allocation of allocation rights by sector, sector, industry, and company, the implementation period of the emissions trading system on January 1, 2015, etc., it is appropriate for the government to set the base year for the calculation of emission permits from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2013, which is the most recent three years prior to each of the above periods.

In a situation where information on the appropriate level of emissions due to diverse productions is insufficient, the two two or more different states have decided to set the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in consideration of the level of emissions in the past, and have uniformly adopted ‘(Gandfing method)’ for most types of business and businesses. Therefore, it is difficult to view that there was a lack of rationality merely without exception to such a method.

② As alleged by the Plaintiffs, even if emission permits are allocated by a method of calculating a wide range of exceptions to the foregoing criteria, as in the calculation method, as seen earlier based on the average emission volume for the remaining two years other than the minimum emission year during the three years of the base year, most expected emission amounts of companies belonging to the same type of business will be increased in accordance with the same standard. Accordingly, the adjustment coefficient would be lower. Accordingly, there seems to be no big difference between the volume allocated to each company by applying the old allocation guidelines and the volume emitted from each company (within the scope of the emission volume by type of business, the measures proposed by the Plaintiffs to improve the rationality are not deemed to have been significantly high (in the current structure where the emission volume by company is set within the scope of the emission volume by type of business).

As the calculation method of this case was established to allocate emission permits by company (the calculation method of this case is not stipulated to allocate emission permits by type of business). The calculation method of this case did not take into account the characteristics of each type of business, and there is little room for the above provision to be applied unfairly to certain companies within the category of business.

② The Defendant’s design volume increase by more than 10%, but the volume of greenhouse gas emissions did not increase by more than 5%, and the design volume does not increase by more than 10%, but it cannot be deemed unreasonable on the ground that “if greenhouse gas emissions increase by more than 5%,” it does not recognize it as an extension.

(1) The introduction of the emissions trading system to achieve national targets for reducing greenhouse gases effectively by using market functions is as seen earlier: Provided, That as emission permits are allocated based on the existing greenhouse gas emissions in order to minimize adverse effects resulting from the introduction of the emissions trading system, if there is no increase in greenhouse gas emissions, there is no reason to additionally allocate emission permits.

If greenhouse gas emissions are considered to be expanded by the increase of design capacity without consideration of the increase of actual greenhouse gas emissions, and it is considered to be reflected in the calculation of anticipated greenhouse gas quotas, greenhouse gas emissions are likely to be allocated in line with the actual output during the planning period.

If the ordinary design capacity increases by 10%, the greenhouse gas emissions should also increase by 10%, and on the ground of the possibility of improving the efficiency of facilities, the defendant demands only more than 5% increase in the actual gas emission quantity among the requirements for extension under the former allocation guidelines. This is reasonable as it is favorable to the company that has expanded the facilities.

② Along with the 10% increase in design capacity among the requirements for extension of the former allocation guidelines, it is difficult to deem that the 10% increase, as well as from the point of view that the 10% increase in design capacity should be applied to the extension, the rationality and adequacy of the standard is sufficiently recognized.

(1) Even if an increase in design capacity by at least 10% has been caused by minor changes to facilities for a small non-use as a requirement, if the greenhouse emissions from which a rapid increase in the rate of operation has increased by at least 5%, such increase may not be recognized as an increase, and the possibility of additional assignment may be prevented on the ground of such increase.

③ It is difficult to view that the Defendant applied the provision regarding the separation facility of this case, which is practically difficult to recognize any exception in calculating indirect emissions, to the Plaintiffs.

① As seen earlier, the provision on the instant electric power use facilities and the provision on the separation facilities of the instant case were prepared on a reasonable ground.

④ Under the provisions on separation facilities in the instant case, “Provided, That where the amount of greenhouse gas emissions in the last year of a facility for the use of electricity at a place of business, which is not separately reported within the base year, is not more than 50 percent of the annual average amount of greenhouse gas emissions in the last year of the base year, the average amount of greenhouse gas emissions in the base year may be calculated as the estimated amount of greenhouse gas emissions in the pertinent compliance year in the pertinent compliance year.” The Defendant provided for exceptions to “the provision on separation facilities in the instant case.” This is to a certain extent to prevent the equity problem that may arise when the provision on separation facilities in the instant case is applied, and thereby, the detailed feasibility of

There is no obligation to establish standards for calculating the estimated amount of greenhouse gas emissions in consideration of all the exceptional circumstances of business entities eligible for allocation, such as production reduction, to the defendant.

② On December 12, 2013, the Defendant had announced the method of calculating the indirect emission of the same content as the provision of the separation facility of this case at the standing 7th subcommittee, at which the Korea Petroleum Chemical Association, to which the Plaintiffs belong, was present. The Plaintiffs were able to ask questions or raise objections regarding the said content even before the enactment of the provision of the separation facility of this case from around that time. However, they did not appear to have so even if they had been able to do so.

① In accordance with the Defendant’s explanation of the provision on electric power use facilities, etc. of this case and the judgment of individual companies accordingly, it appears that there are companies that changed the method of not reporting the previous volume of electric power system by separately establishing and separately reporting the volume of electric power system. In other words, whether any disadvantage arising from the method of reporting indirect emission is determined depending on the company’s choice, or not arising from the provision on separation facilities of this case.

④ It shall not be deemed unfair by deeming that the estimated greenhouse gas emissions of the newly established and expanded facilities that the Defendant expected are calculated using the method of prior allocation.

① Unless there is a theory on the increase of anticipated greenhouse gas emissions on the ground of the establishment and extension facilities during a commitment period, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant’s decision should be respected as to whether the allocation method should be made in advance, and whether the additional allocation method should be made in principle as policy decision matters (it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s aforementioned method is changed from the prior allocation deferment to the additional allocation allocation method, even if it is promoted by the Defendant to change it from the additional allocation mode, it cannot be viewed as changing it from

In cases where the allocation of emission permits according to the expected greenhouse gas emissions of newly established and expanded facilities is made in advance, the proportion allocated among business entities eligible for allocation in the type of business is more likely to be similar to the proportion of actual greenhouse gas emissions during the commitment period, and the proportion of reserve shares to be additionally allocated for facilities newly established and expanded is more reasonable than that of additional allocation in terms of the aspect that the proportion allocated among business entities eligible for allocation in the type of business is more likely to be similar to the proportion of actual greenhouse gas emissions.

Pursuant to the former allocation method as well as the former allocation method, the applicable adjustment factor of the allocation of the type of business to which the company to which the above facility belongs, as the above method was applied, would inevitably be reduced. However, this is not derived from the above prior allocation method, not from the structure where the quantity of the company's emission is determined within the range of the quantity discharged by each type of business.

(2) Since the adjustment coefficient is the coefficient obtained by dividing the allocation by type of business by the total of recognized amounts among the applied amounts of all business entities eligible for allocation in the type of business, there is little room for the defendant to intervene in the calculation of the adjustment coefficient. Rather, in terms of the fact that the application of the business entity eligible for allocation is previously filed in the determination of the amount of greenhouse gas emissions by the business entity eligible for allocation,

(1) When the same adjustment coefficient applies to each business entity eligible for allocation within the scope of allocation by type of business determined by a plan for allocation of emission permits, as long as emission permits are applied to each business entity eligible for allocation within the structure of allocation of emission permits.

⑤ Since a limited amount of greenhouse gas emissions established by the State is divided by sector and by business type, and the allocation by business type is divided by business type in the same business type, the allocation of one business entity eligible for allocation is bound to inevitably affect the allocation by another business entity eligible for allocation within the same business type. Therefore, it is difficult to deem that the allocation of emission permits is unfair unless specific circumstances, such as where a disposition to determine allocation to a specific business entity eligible for allocation is based on strict criteria different from that to other business entity eligible for allocation in the same business type, or where a common factor of the business type is not applied to the relevant business entity eligible for allocation, are not revealed to violate the principle of equity or proportionality,

G. Determination on Plaintiff 000’s unique assertion

1) Whether the reason for the disposition violates the duty to present reason

As seen earlier, the instant disposition, including the part related to Plaintiff ○○○, did not violate the duty of presentation of reasons for the disposition under Article 23(1) of the Administrative Procedures Act. Moreover, in light of the fact that Plaintiff ○○○○○○ was unfairly rejected on the part related to Plaintiff ○○○○○, among the instant disposition, during the instant disposition, and that Plaintiff ○○○○○○○ did not raise an objection in detail on the grounds that Plaintiff ○○○○○ was unfairly rejected on the part related to Plaintiff ○○○○○, among the instant disposition, and that Plaintiff ○○○○○○○○○

2) Whether to recognize the extension of indirect discharge facilities among the NCC facilities of this case

A) Facts of recognition

(1) The NCC facility of this case in the leisure business place of Plaintiff ○○○○○, through the NCC process, burns fuel first put in as a facility for producing Initial raw materials, and directly produces straws and electricity by using process heat generated.

(2) As above, the ice Team and electricity produced as above consumed the required quantity in the NCC facility itself, and the remaining ice Team and electricity are transferred to the lower process facility, such as the BTX PLT (hereinafter “instant BTX facility”).

(3) On April 2012, Plaintiff ○○○○○ extended the design capacity of the instant NCC facilities from 1,129, 00 tons to 1,500 tons, and 00 tons.

(4) Meanwhile, Plaintiff ○○○○ filed a report by dividing the amount of greenhouse gas emissions from the instant NCC facilities into a process combustion facility (fixed combustion), a promotional regeneration process (fair combustion), and a flag, on the National Greenhouse Gas Integrated Management System (NGM). The value of a fixed combustion is automatically generated by Plaintiff ○○○○○’s entry of the amount of fuel invested in the instant NCC facilities, and other values are arbitrarily recorded in the amount of emissions corresponding to that of the S Team and electricity transferred by Plaintiff ○○○○ to the instant BTX facilities. Accordingly, the amount of greenhouse gas emissions confirmed in the specifications are as follows.

A person shall be appointed.

(5) While reporting the discharge amount of the instant BTX facilities, the Plaintiff ○○○○ arbitrarily stated the quantity corresponding to the team and electricity transferred from the NCC facilities of the instant case and reported it as an indirect discharge.

(6) On the ground that the part reported as a fair combustion facility among the NCC facilities of this case meets the requirements for extension under the former Allocation Guidelines, the Defendant additionally allocated a string emission permit recognized as a string facility during the standard year.

[Ground of recognition] - Each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 5, 6, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 28 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

B) Determination

The provision on the calculation method of this case, which provides for the calculation method of greenhouse gas emissions in the reference year, is effective as an external binding legal order in combination with each corresponding provision of the Emission Trading Act and the Enforcement Decree of the Emission Trading Act. In addition, the provisions related to newly established and expanded facilities in the previous allocation guidelines should be interpreted faithfully with the meaning of the language and text, barring special circumstances, and should not be excessively expanded without reasonable grounds.

In full view of the facts acknowledged above based on the above interpretation criteria, it cannot be deemed that the extension of the standard year stipulated in Article 10(1)1(d) of the former Guidelines for Allocation among the NCC facilities of this case is an indirect emission facility (other facilities). The main grounds are as follows.

① The Plaintiff ○○○○○ may extend the instant NCC facilities due to the construction of the NCC facilities.

As the volume of electricity usage increased by the SCOs and electricity usage increased, the amount of the SCOs and electricity transferred to the instant BTX facilities, etc., and that reduced amount is the increased amount of emissions. Plaintiff ○○○○○, even based on the Plaintiff’s assertion, the part where the increased amount of greenhouse gas emissions occurred due to the increased amount of operation of the instant NCC facilities, not due to the increased amount of operation self-generating of the instant NCC facilities.

1B Of the NCC facilities of this case, it is doubtful whether indirect emission facilities are independent facilities of the NCC facilities of this case for a specific process by using its own team, electricity production, or the use thereof.

③ The Defendant recognized the increase in greenhouse gas emissions due to the increase in the operating performance of the instant NCC facilities as an extension under the former allocation guidelines. However, since fixed greenhouse gas emissions are automatically calculated by using the fuel input to the instant NCC facilities, such values include both the ice team and electricity used by the NCC itself and the quantity equivalent to the ice team and electricity used by Plaintiff ○○○○○○ in the instant BTX facilities, etc. (i) and the quantity corresponding to the ice team and electricity consumption within the instant NCC facilities, actually, can be claimed as a limitation on the quantity of the indirect emission facilities from among the NCC facilities of the instant NCC facilities. Accordingly, the part recognized by the Defendant as an extension of the instant NCC facilities can also be deemed as having been reflected in the increased quantity of the instant facilities due to the decrease in the volume of the NCC facilities of the instant facilities itself.

④ According to Article 2 subparag. 2 of the Emission Trading Act, Article 2 subparag. 10 of the Framework Act, and Article 2 subparag. 10 of the former Management Guidelines, the emission volume of electricity supplied outside can be calculated as indirect emission quantity. Accordingly, the emission volume corresponding to the electricity/s team transferred by Plaintiff ○○○○○ to the instant NCC facilities within the same place of business cannot be indirectly classified as indirect emission quantity (if it can be classified, the emission volume is recognized as the emission volume of the instant NCC facilities, not as the emission volume of indirect emission facilities among the NCC facilities in the instant case).

⑤ Since it is recognized that there is a need to clearly distinguish both indirect emission and direct emission by relaxing the control coefficient differently from direct emission with regard to indirect emission, it is difficult to readily conclude that it is unreasonable to recognize only the “emission quantity resulting from the use of electricity supplied from outside” as indirect emission, as in the foregoing provision.

Therefore, the plaintiff ○○○○'s assertion on this part is without merit.

3) Whether to recognize the expected establishment and extension of a small and medium business establishment

Article 5(1)2(c) and (3) of the former Allocation Guidelines provide that a business entity eligible for allocation shall report and prepare information on emission of greenhouse gases in order to receive the allocation of greenhouse gas emission permits on the grounds that the construction and extension of facilities are anticipated between the planning periods, and shall also submit evidentiary data on the anticipated installation and extension of facilities, design capacity, capacity before and after the establishment of new facilities, capacity of the new facilities in the case of the extension, capacity of the previous design before and after the establishment, capacity of the new facilities in the case of the last year of the base year of similar facilities belonging to the relevant place of business or the relevant business, which are anticipated to use the last year operation performance in the relevant year.

The written evidence Nos. 5 and 6 submitted by the Plaintiff ○○○○○ alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff ○○○○ submitted all the above documentary evidence to the Defendant on the ground that there is a facility expected to be newly established and expanded at the leisure place of business during the planned period. Rather, according to the written evidence No. 24-1, it is only recognized that the Plaintiff ○○○○ was not recognized as having been newly established and expanded at the leisure place of business at the time of raising an objection against the instant wife portion at the time of raising an objection against the Defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff ○○○○'s assertion on this part is without merit.

아 . 원고 ▲▲▲▲ 고유의 주장에 관한 판단

1) Facts of recognition

가 ) 원고 ▲▲▲▲는 2014 . 12 . 경 온산사업장에 이 사건 EO / EG 시설을 신설하 였다 .

B) The instant EO/EG facilities are facilities producing EO (Ethlene Xxide, ethylenehyd) and EG (Ethylenene Glycol, ethyleneglycol) by using energy supplied to the boiler facilities of this case (referring to facilities supplying teams to other facilities within the greenhouse-industrial establishment) which have occurred in the process of burning waste gas and the existing facilities.

다 ) 원고 ▲▲▲▲는 피고에게 계획기간 온실가스 배출권 할당을 신청하면서 , 이 사건 EO / EG 시설의 신설과 관련하여 ① 시설 자체에서 공정열을 발생시키는 공정 연 소시설의 고정연소 , ② EO 생산공정상 발생하는 공정연소와 ③ 이 사건 보일러 시설 이 이 사건 EO / EG 시설에 스팀을 공급하는 간접배출로 구분하여 , 각각 그에 상응하는 배출권 할당을 신청하였다 .

라 ) 피고는 이 사건 처분 당시 이 사건 EO / EG 시설의 공정 연소시설 [ 위 다 ) 의 ①시설 ] 계획기간 예상 배출량 22 , 341KAU를 인정하였고 , 이후 원고 ▲▲▲▲의 이의 신청 중 일부를 받아들여 이 사건 EO / EG 시설의 공정연소 [ 위 다 ) 의 ②시설 ] 계획기간 예상 배출량 88 , 443KAU를 추가로 인정하였다 . 다만 , 이 사건 보일러 시설의 스팀 공급 [ 위 다 ) 의 ③시설에 따른 계획기간 예상 간접배출량 147 , 984KAU는 이 사건 보일러 시 설의 단순 가동률 증가에 불과하여 ' 증설 ' 의 요건에 부합하지 않는다면서 이를 인정하

did not.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap's statements in Gap's 18, 19, 20, and 21, and the whole pleadings

2) Determination

In the instant case, even if the rate of operation for the production of the boilers of the instant boiler facilities increases due to the construction of the instant EO/EG facilities, the physical change is not added to the boiler facilities themselves, but thereby the design capacity of the boiler facilities of the instant case is not increased. As a result, the construction of the instant EO/EG facilities, which is an existing facility, constitutes “extension” as defined in Article 2 subparag. 16 of the former Guidelines on Allocation, cannot be deemed as clearly deviating from the meaning of the language.

However, with respect to the increase in the rate of operation for the production of teams of the boiler facilities of this case due to the construction of the instant EO/EG facilities, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant did not consider and recognize the anticipated actual gas emissions, unlike the operation of the expected new and expanded facilities, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant, without reasonable grounds, deviates from and abused discretion against the principle of equality, due to discrimination without reasonable grounds. The specific grounds are as follows.

① The Act on Emission Trading and Related Acts and subordinate statutes, etc. are based on the premise that greenhouse gas emissions naturally increase if the size of the facility increases or new facilities are newly installed. Accordingly, the instant EO/EG facilities are naturally premised on the Emission Trading Act, etc. that greenhouse gas emissions increase due to the establishment of a new physical type of a new EO/EG facility. In fact, the instant EO/EG facilities increase greenhouse gas emissions due to the increase in the operation of boiler facilities of the instant boiler facilities following the construction of the instant EO/EG facilities.

② 이처럼 이 사건 EO / EG 시설의 신설에 따른 온실가스 배출량의 증가는 당연 히 예측 또는 예상되는 상황이기 때문에 , 이는 업체의 대내외적 여건에 따라 언제든지 변동되는 것으로서 , 예측 또는 예상하기가 쉽지 않은 ' 시설의 가동률 ' 증감 문제와는 본질적으로 다르다 ( 이 사건에서의 온실가스 배출량 증가는 원고 ▲▲▲▲가 상당한 비 용을 들인 ' 물리적 추가 ' 를 원인으로 하기 때문이다 ) .

③ According to the former allocation guidelines, the portion used in the ES/EG facilities of this case newly established is recognized as a fixed exhaust, and if supplied from the boiler facilities newly established and expanded in the said time to that end, it is recognized as a fixed exhauster of the boiler facilities, which are newly installed and extended facilities, and if supplied from outside parts, it is recognized as an indirect discharge of the ES/EG facilities of this case. In light of the fact that the portion used in the ES/EG facilities of this case is produced and produced, and greenhouse gas is emitted therefrom, there is a need and a reasonable ground to recognize in any form of discharge.

1. The volume of the instant boiler emission corresponding to the S Team that supplies the instant boiler facilities to the instant EO/EG facilities can be calculated based on the necessary team quantity calculated through the facility capacity, operating hours, inputs of raw materials, etc. In such a case, it is similar to the estimated emission quantity of greenhouse gases expected to be newly established and expanded facilities pursuant to Article 10(1)2 of the former Guidelines in that the calculation method of the said greenhouse gas emission quantity is based on objective information and the calculation method using such objective information (i.e., the total emission quantity cannot be denied solely on the grounds that the amount of greenhouse gas emission in the instant case is not completely identical to that of Article 10(1)2 of the former Guidelines on Allocation (i.e., the calculation method cannot be based on the grounds that the amount of greenhouse gas emissions in the instant case cannot be calculated in the manner of calculation under the said provision).

1. Considering the increase in the rate of operation of existing facilities connected with the increase in the construction and extension of facilities as one element of the recognition of greenhouse gas emissions, it is difficult to view such recognition as measures that make it difficult for the establishment of this Act itself or take into account only the circumstances of specific business entities eligible for allocation, such as the defendant's assertion, because it is determined based on objective data, such as Article 2 subparagraph 16 and Article 10 (1) 2 of the former Allocation Guidelines. In addition, since the increase in greenhouse gas emissions is clear as objective data, and it is anticipated that it will result in an excessive allocation problem like the defendant's fear.

(6) According to the construction of the instant EO/G facilities, including the increased emission volume of the boiler facilities of this case corresponding to the boiler facilities of this case in the estimated greenhouse gas emission quantity, in consideration of the anticipated growth rate of business entities eligible for allocation, is also consistent with the legislative intent of Article 12(2) of the Emission Trading Act and Article 12(1)5 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Emission Trading Act, to determine the allocation of greenhouse gas emission permits.

7) According to the construction of the instant EO/EG facilities, the increase in greenhouse gas emissions due to the increase of greenhouse gas emissions and the operation of new and expanded facilities expected to increase the greenhouse gas emissions due to the said increase in the capacity utilization by the installation of the boiler facilities of this case. The difference between physically added facilities and the facilities that generate and increase greenhouse gas emissions by reducing greenhouse gas emissions is not verified in other parts. Such difference does not constitute an essential difference in terms of the legislative intent of the emissions trading system (i.e., Article 2 subparag. 2 of the Emission Trading Act, Article 2 subparag. 10 of the Framework Act, and Article 2 subparag. 10 of the former Guidelines for Management of the said Act, and Article 2 subparag. 2 of the former Guidelines do not recognize an indirect emission quantity from the use of energy supplied within the same company, and it is only due to a policy decision that recognizes the direct emission quantity of facilities that supply energy as the directly emission quantity).

8) According to Article 12, Article 13, Article 14, and the main sentence of Article 15(1) of the former Guidelines, the defendant does not determine the allocation of each company according to the proposal for determining the allocation of allocation to each company established in accordance with Article 10 of the former Guidelines, but rather determines the allocation of each company through deliberation, adjustment, etc. by the deliberation committee on allocation decision by considering all circumstances based on the proposal for determining allocation of allocation to each company. Accordingly, the defendant's refusal of allocation of greenhouse gas emission permits by the reason that any facility does not fall under any subparagraph of Article 10(1) of the former Guidelines can be evaluated as not exercising the discretionary power given to him/her.

따라서 이를 지적하는 원고 ▲▲▲▲의 주장은 이유 있다 .

3 ) 이 사건 처분 중 원고 ▲▲▲▲의 취소 범위

피고는 신설된 이 사건 EO / EG 시설에 공급하여야 할 스팀 생산을 위해 이 사건 보일러 시설의 가동이 증가함에 따라 이 사건 보일러 시설로부터 배출될 것으로 예상 되는 온실가스의 배출량을 산정하고 , 이에 조정계수를 적용하여 인정되는 계획기간 온 실가스 배출권 상당량을 원고 ▲▲▲▲에게 추가적으로 할당하였어야 함에도 이를 거 부한 부분은 취소되어야 할 것이다 .

그런데 이 사건에서 제출된 자료만으로는 이 사건 보일러 시설의 가동이 증가함 에 따라 이 사건 보일러 시설로부터 배출될 것으로 예상되는 온실가스의 배출량을 산 정할 수 없으므로 ( 피고는 이 사건 보일러 시설이 증설 시설에 해당하지 않는다는 이유 만으로 원고 ▲▲▲▲가 제출한 추가할당을 위한 자료가 정확한 수치에 의하여 산정된 것인지 등에 관하여까지 검토하지는 않은 것으로 보인다 ) , 원고 ▲▲▲▲에게 추가되었 어야 할 온실가스 배출권 할당량을 산정하기 위해 이 사건 처분 중 원고 ▲▲▲▲ 부 분 전체를 취소할 수밖에 없다 .

3. Conclusion

원고 ▲▲▲▲의 청구는 이유 있어 이를 인용하고 , 나머지 원고들의 청구는 이유 없 어 이를 기각한다 .

Judge Lee Jin-man

Judge Song Byung-hun

Judges Song Jong-sung

Attached Table 1

Details of allocation of greenhouse gas emission permits during the first commitment period;

[unit: a considerable amount of carbon dioxide (tCO2 - eq)]

Attached Table 2

Relevant statutes

Act on the Allocation and Trading of Greenhouse Gas Emission Permits

The purpose of this Act is to achieve the State's targets for reduction of greenhouse gases effectively by introducing a system for trading greenhouse gas emission permits pursuant to Article 46 of the Framework Act on Low Carbon, Green Growth.

Article 2 (Definitions) The definitions of terms used in this Act shall be as follows:

1. The term "greenhouse gases" means greenhouse gases defined in subparagraph 9 of Article 2 of the Framework Act on Low Carbon, Green Growth (hereinafter referred to as the "Framework Act");

means actual gas.

2. The term "greenhouse gas emissions" means greenhouse gas emissions defined in subparagraph 10 of Article 2 of the Framework Act;

3. The term "emission permits" means targets for the reduction of greenhouse gases under Article 42 (1) 1 of the Framework Act (hereinafter referred to as "national greenhouse gas reduction");

Permission for the emission of greenhouse gases established pursuant to Article 5 (1) 1 to achieve a reduction target (hereinafter referred to as "the reduction target").

It means the permissible amount of greenhouse gas emissions allocated to an individual greenhouse gas-emitting business entity within the total quantity.

4. The term "period" means an enterprise producing greenhouse gases every five years to achieve national greenhouse-gas reduction targets;

the period set to allocate emission permits and to manage their performance results.

5. The term "year-end greenhouse gases" means greenhouse gases to achieve national greenhouse gas reduction targets for each commitment period;

Within the commitment period established to allocate emission permits to emission enterprises and to manage their performance results;

each year.

6. "One ton of comparable CO2 equivalents (tCO2 - eq)" means one ton of comparable CO2 equivalents or subparagraph 9 of Article 2 of the Framework Act;

Other greenhouse gas's global warming means the amount equivalent to one ton of carbon dioxide.

Article 4 (Establishment, etc. of Master Plan for Emission Trading System) (1) The Government shall establish a ten-year master plan to effectively achieve the purpose of this Act for the emissions trading system, every five years;

(2) A master plan shall include the following matters:

1. Matters concerning the current status of and prospects for the emission trading system in Korea and abroad;

2. Matters concerning the basic direction-setting for the operation of the emission trading system;

3. Matters regarding the operation of commitment periods for the emissions trading system, taking into account national greenhouse-gas reduction targets;

4. Places of business and new investment and facilities by sector or by business type (including places of business or part of greenhouse gas emissions);

Matters concerning prospects for greenhouse gas emissions due to expansion, etc.; hereinafter the same shall apply);

5. Matters regarding economic impacts of the operation of the emission trading system, such as energy prices and price fluctuations;

6. Matters concerning measures for supporting domestic industries, taking into account trade intensity, carbon intensity, etc.;

7. Matters concerning measures for linking with international carbon markets and international cooperation;

8. Article 5 (Establishment, etc. of National Emission Permits Allocation Plan) (1) The Government shall establish a national emission permits Allocation Plan (hereinafter referred to as "Allocation Plan") including the following matters for each commitment period in order to effectively achieve national greenhouse-gas reduction targets by six months before the beginning of each commitment period, in order to achieve national greenhouse-gas reduction targets:

1. Total permissible volume of greenhouse gas emission determined in consideration of national greenhouse gas reduction targets (hereinafter referred to as "total permissible volume of emission");

(d) Matters concerning

2. Matters regarding the total number of emission permits for the pertinent commitment period and for each compliance year based on total emission allowances;

3. Matters regarding sectors and types of business eligible for allocation of emission permits;

4. Matters concerning standards for allocation of emission permits by sector and by business type and the allocation of emission permits;

5. Matters concerning standards for allocation of emission permits by compliance year and the allocation of emission permits;

6. Matters regarding the standards and methods for the allocation of emission permits to business entities eligible for allocation under Article 8;

7. Matters regarding the method for allocating emission permits, where emission permits are allocated commercially under Article 12 (3);

8. Matters concerning the criteria for recognition of outcomes of earlier reduction under Article 15;

9. Matters concerning the quantity of and standards for allocation of emission permits in reserve under Article 18;

10. Matters regarding the carryover and borrowing of emission permits under Article 28 and the standards for offset under Article 29 and the operation thereof;

11. Other matters necessary for the allocation and trading of emission permits for the pertinent commitment period, which are prescribed by Presidential Decree.

set forth in the section of

(2) In determining matters concerning the subparagraphs of paragraph (1), the Government shall take into account the conditions for application of the emission trading system by sector and by business type, impact on the international competitiveness, etc.

(3) If the Government deems it necessary to revise an allocation plan due to a sudden change in a domestic or foreign economic situation, technological advancement, etc., it may examine the feasibility of the revision to revise the allocation plan.

(4) When formulating or amending an allocation plan, the Government shall hold a public hearing in advance to hear the opinions of interested persons, and shall reflect the opinions presented at the public hearing in the allocation plan when deemed reasonable.

Article 8 (Designation of Business Entities Eligible for Allocation) (1) The head of a central administrative agency prescribed by Presidential Decree (hereinafter referred to as "competent authority") shall designate and publicly announce any of the following business entities eligible for allocation of emission permits (hereinafter referred to as "business entity eligible for allocation") from among the sectors eligible for allocation of emission permits prescribed by the allocation plan pursuant to Article 5 (1) 3 and greenhouse gas emission business entities belonging to the types of business by no later than five months before the beginning of each commitment period:

1. Greenhouse gases from among controlled entities under Article 42 (5) of the Framework Act (hereinafter referred to as " controlled entities") for the last three years;

an enterprise whose annual total quantities of emissions are 125,000 tons of comparable CO2 equivalents (tCO2 - eq) or more; or

25. A business entity at a place of business with a capacity of at least 000 tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (tCO2 - eq)

Article 12 (Allocation of Emission Permits) (1) The competent authority shall allocate all emission permits during each commitment period to business entities eligible for allocation in accordance with the allocation plan and annual emission permits for each implementation year: Provided, That with respect to new landowners, the authority shall allocate emission permits to the remaining commitment period from the following compliance year designated and publicly notified by the business entity eligible for allocation.

(2) Criteria for allocation of emission permits under paragraph (1) shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree, in consideration of the following matters:

1. Demand for emission permits by year for business entities eligible for allocation;

2. The outcomes of earlier reduction under Article 15;

3. Results of the surrender of emission permits by business entities eligible for allocation under Article 27;

4. Trade intensity and carbon intensity of a business entity eligible for allocation;

5. Equity in allocation of emission permits among business entities eligible for allocation;

6. Technology levels and international competitiveness for reducing greenhouse gases by sector and by sector;

7. The degree of contribution of facilities investment, etc. of business entities eligible for allocation to attain national greenhouse gas reduction targets.

8. Outcomes of compliance with targets of controlled entities under Article 42 (6) of the Framework Act;

(3) Emission permits under paragraph (1) shall be allocated, with or without consideration, and determined by Presidential Decree shall take into consideration the impact on international competitiveness of the domestic industry, international trends, such as international negotiations related to climate change, impact on the national economy, such as price, evaluation of the immediately preceding commitment period, and other relevant factors.

(4) Notwithstanding paragraph (3), all emission permits may be allocated gratuitously to a business entity eligible for allocation which belongs to the business entity eligible for allocation, the international trade intensity of which is higher than the standard prescribed by Presidential Decree or the production cost due to the reduction of greenhouse gases conducted in excess of the standard prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Article 13 (Application for Allocation of Emission Permits) (1) A business entity eligible for allocation shall prepare an application for allocation of emission permits (hereinafter referred to as "application for allocation"), which shall include the followinggs, at least four months prior to the beginning of each commitment period (or at least four months prior to the beginning of the compliance year in which emission permits are allocated, if a business entity eligible for allocation is a new entry):

(1) Enforcement Decree of the former Act on the Allocation and Trading of Greenhouse Gas Emission Permits (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 27181, May 24, 2016)

Article 3 (Formulation, etc. of National Emission Permits Allocation Plans) (1) Pursuant to Article 5 of the Act, the Minister of Environment shall formulate a national emission permits Allocation Plan (hereinafter referred to as "Allocation Plan") in consideration of the conformity with the objectives of reducing greenhouse gases under Article 42 (1) 1 of the Framework Act.

(8) The Minister of Environment shall publish a plan for allocation determined under Article 5 (5) of the Act in the Official Gazette, Internet homepage, etc.

Article 6 (Designation, etc. of Business Entities Eligible for allocation) (1) "The head of a central administrative agency prescribed by Presidential Decree" in the main sentence of Article 8 (1) of the Act means the Minister of Environment (hereinafter referred to as "competent administrative agency").

Article 12 (Standards, etc. for Allocation of Emission Permits) (1) The competent authority shall determine allocation of emission permits to each business entity eligible for allocation in consideration of the matters in the subparagraphs of Article 12 (2) of the Act and the following matters:

1. National greenhouse gas reduction targets and greenhouse gas reduction targets by sector under Article 42 of the Framework Act;

2. Allocation of emission permits by sector or by business type under Article 5 (1) 4 of the Act;

3. Quantity of greenhouse gases emitted or technical levels of the relevant business entity eligible for allocation in the past;

4. Ratio of emission permits allocated gratuitously pursuant to Article 13 (hereinafter referred to as "ratio of gratuitous allocation");

5. Expected growth rate of the relevant type of business or business entity eligible for allocation during the commitment period;

6. Expansion and continuation of operation of means of public transportation for the establishment of low-carbon traffic systems under Article 53 of the Framework Act;

Measures and measures for transportation of large and heavy freight referred to in Article 20 of the applicable Transportation Logistics Development Act shall have been taken by the State.

Degree of contribution to the reduction of Switzerland emissions;

Contribution to reducing national greenhouse gas emissions by utilizing inflammable wastes instead of fossil fuels;

Degree

8. The same kind of domestic and overseas results and results of greenhouse gas emissions, etc. per unit activity data, such as product output, etc.

The extent calculated by the benchmarking method (hereinafter referred to as "benmarking method") compared to the emission facilities or the process;

(2) Detailed matters concerning methods for calculating emission permits allocated under paragraph (1) shall be determined and publicly notified by the competent authority in the Official Gazette after consultation with the heads of related central administrative agencies.

Article 15 (Submission of Applications for Allocation of Emission Permits) (1) A business entity eligible for allocation shall prepare an application for allocation of emission permits under Article 13 (1) of the Act (hereinafter referred to as "application for allocation") for each of the following units and submit it to the competent authority by electronic means. In such cases, subparagraphs 3 through 5 shall be submitted only in cases where the allocation of emission permits is determined by applying the convention method:

1. Unit of an enterprise including all places of business belonging to a business entity eligible for allocation;

2. Unit of workplace of a business entity eligible for allocation;

3. When a business entity eligible for allocation produces various final products, the business entity shall produce the same items;

The unit of a final product item combined with all of the affiliated places of business;

4. Final production when places of business belonging to a business entity eligible for allocation are many final products;

Product-specific units

5. Parts of the final product items referred to in subparagraphs 3 and 4 of a place of business belonging to a business entity eligible for allocation.

agency that produces only raw material

(2) The competent authority shall determine and publicly notify detailed matters concerning procedures for submitting and examining applications for allocation under paragraph (1) in consultation with the heads of relevant central administrative agencies.

Article 16 (Determination of Allocation of Emission Permits by Business Entities Eligible for Allocation) (1) In order to determine the allocation of emission permits to each business entity eligible for allocation referred to in Article 12, the competent authority shall organize and operate a Dong Working Group (hereinafter referred to as the "Joint Working Group") comprised of the head of the Integrated Information Center as a head of the Ban (hereinafter referred to as the "head of the Ban").

(2) The joint working group shall be comprised of not more than 30 persons, including experts recommended by the head of the agency responsible for each sector, from among experts in relevant industrial, research, and academic circles.

(3) A working group by sector (hereinafter referred to as "working group by sector") shall be established under the control of the head of a Ban in order to authorize the joint working group to prepare a proposal for determining the allocation of allocation to a business entity eligible for allocation that belongs to each sector.

(4) The working group by sector shall examine an application for allocation based on the criteria for allocation plans, criteria for and methods of calculation of allocation of emission permits under Article 12 and prepare a proposal for determining allocation by business entity eligible for allocation to which the relevant sector belongs.

(5) The head of a Ban shall prepare a proposal for determination of allocation to each business entity eligible for allocation prepared by the working groups by sector pursuant to paragraph (4) by comprehensively examining and adjusting the proposal for allocation to each business entity eligible for allocation.

(6) The head of a Ban shall submit a proposal for determination of allocation to each business entity eligible for allocation prepared pursuant to paragraph (5) to the competent authority by no later than three months prior to the beginning of the commitment period (in cases of allocation to voluntary participating business entities and new visitors, by no later than three months prior to the beginning

(7) The competent authority shall determine allocation by business entity eligible for allocation through consultation with the heads of related central administrative agencies and deliberation and adjustment by the deliberation committee on determinations of allocation under Article 18.

(8) The head of the relevant central administrative agency may request the competent authority to submit data or information, such as a written application for allocation, if necessary for consultation under paragraph (7), and the competent authority so requested shall cooperate therewith, if any special ground exists to the contrary.

(9) If the competent authority fails to make an adjustment by the deliberation committee on determinations of allocation under paragraph (7), it shall undergo deliberation and adjustment by the relevant committee. The same shall also apply where a deliberation committee on reasonable decisions to be conducted under Articles 20 (2), 21 (8) and 22 (8) fails to do so.

(1) The competent authority shall report allocation to each business entity eligible for allocation determined pursuant to paragraph (7) to the Allocation Committee: Provided, That this shall not apply when it has undergone deliberation and adjustment by the Allocation Committee pursuant to paragraph (9).

Enforcement Decree of the Act on Allocation and Trading of Greenhouse Gas Emission Permits

Article 2 (Establishment, etc. of Master Plan for Emission Trading System) (1) Pursuant to Article 4 of the Act on Allocation and Trading of Greenhouse Gases (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), the Minister of Strategy and Finance shall establish a Master Plan for Emission Trading System (hereinafter referred to as the "Master Plan") by one year prior to the beginning of each commitment period.

Article 6 (Designation, etc. of Business Entities Eligible for allocation) (1) The competent authority under Articles 8, 9, 11 through 18, 20 through 34, 36 through 40, and 43 of the Act shall be institutions classified as follows (hereinafter referred to as "competent authority"):

2. The following matters: The agency responsible for each sector (which shall be determined by jurisdiction pursuant to Article 26 (3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act:

The term "head of a J-related central administrative agency" means the head of a J-related central administrative agency;

(a) Designation and public notification of business entities eligible for allocation under Articles 8 and 9 of the Act;

(b) Management of the emission permits register under Article 11 of the Act.

(c) Allocation and notification following an application for emission permits under Articles 12 through 14 of the Act;

(f) Full or partial revocation of allocation of emission permits under Article 17 of the Act;

Article 15 (Submission of Applications for Allocation of Emission Permits) (1) A business entity eligible for allocation shall prepare an application for allocation of emission permits under Article 13 (1) of the Act (hereinafter referred to as "application for allocation") for each of the following units and submit it to the competent authority by electronic means. In such cases, subparagraphs 3 through 5 shall be submitted only in cases where the allocation of emission permits is determined by applying the convention method:

1. Unit of an enterprise including all places of business belonging to a business entity eligible for allocation;

2. Unit of workplace of a business entity eligible for allocation;

3. When a business entity eligible for allocation produces various final products, the business entity shall produce the same items;

The unit of a final product item combined with all of the affiliated places of business;

4. Final production when places of business belonging to a business entity eligible for allocation are many final products;

Product-specific units

5. Parts of the final product items referred to in subparagraphs 3 and 4 of a place of business belonging to a business entity eligible for allocation.

agency that produces only raw material

Article 17 (Notice, etc. of Allocation of Emission Permits by Business Entities Eligible for Allocation) (1) The competent authority shall notify the relevant business entities eligible for allocation of emission permits to be allocated to each business entity eligible for allocation determined pursuant to Article 16 at least two months before the beginning of the commitment period (in cases of voluntary participating enterprises and new entry entities, at least two months before the beginning

Gu Guidelines on the Allocation, Adjustment, and Revocation of Greenhouse Gas Emission Permits (before the abolition by Ordinance of the Ministry of Environment No. 2016 - 100 on June 8, 2016)

Article 1 (Purpose) The purpose of these Guidelines is to prescribe detailed matters and procedures for the designation of companies eligible for allocation of emission permits (hereinafter referred to as "business entities eligible for allocation") under Articles 8 and 9 of the Act on the Allocation and Trading of Greenhouse Gases (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") and Articles 6 through 8 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Allocation and Trading of Greenhouse Gases (hereinafter referred to as the "Decree"), methods of calculating allocation of emission permits under Articles 12 through 14 of the Act and Articles 12 and 15 through 17 of the Decree, and the procedures for the receipt and examination of applications for allocation of emission permits under Articles 16 and 21 of the Act (hereinafter referred to as "application for allocation"), and the revocation, etc. of allocation of emission permits under Article 17 of the Act and Article 22 of the Decree.

Article 2 (Definitions) The definitions of terms used in this Guideline shall be as follows:

4. The term "existing facilities" means existing facilities by a business entity eligible for allocation up to the year immediately preceding the beginning of each commitment period (Article 3 (1) 3 and 3;

When an enterprise under subparagraph 5 is designated as a business entity eligible for allocation, it shall be designated as the business entity eligible for allocation.

Do up to the Do) emission facilities reported to the Minister of Environment in a statement submitted.

5. The term "business under Article 3 (1) 3 and 5 for three years from four years before the beginning of each commitment period in the relevant year (business under Article 3 (1) 3 and 5);

When an enterprise is designated as a business entity eligible for allocation, three years immediately preceding the year designated as the relevant business entity eligible for allocation.

B) means B;

7. The term "discharge facilities" means facilities, machinery, apparatus, and other objects that emit greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, respectively;

(including subsidiary materials and additives) or the whole process from the point in which fuel is put into a material (including subsidiary materials and additives) or fuel;

2. In such cases, the term "relevant process" means a facility group in which fuel or raw materials are input, and the term "facility group" means a facility group;

person means a unit that combines facilities that play a similar role and function for the same purpose;

9. The term "place of business" means goods with dominant influence on the same corporation, public institution, individual, etc.;

Places, buildings and auxiliary facilities having a certain boundary for a series of activities, such as production, provision of services, etc.

means any such institution, etc.

13. "Types of business" shall be determined in the allocation plan of national emission permits under Article 3 of the Decree (hereinafter referred to as "distribution plan");

agency eligible for allocation shall be organized according to the classification in accordance with the similarity of industrial activities mainly conducted by the agency eligible for allocation.

tangible objects means those which are classified.

14. The term "enterprise" means all places of business in which the same corporation, public institution, individual, etc. has dominant influence;

group means a group of members.

16. The term "extension" means alteration by adding physical changes directly to existing facilities to those that contribute to production activities.

In preparation for the relocation of the existing facilities, the design capacity of the existing facilities increases by at least 10/100, and greenhouse gas emissions.

It means an increase of not less than 5/100 of this Act.

Article 10 (Preparation of Draft Decision on Allocation by Company) (1) In addition to matters referred to in the subparagraphs of Article 12 (2) of the Act and the subparagraphs of Article 12 (1) of the Decree, a working group by sector shall prepare a draft decision on allocation by company on the basis of the source emission quantity, the estimated greenhouses of each business entity belonging to the relevant sector, which are calculated after examining applications for allocation, specifications and evidential data in accordance with the following standards. In such cases, detailed methods of calculation shall be as specified in Table 1:

1. Estimated greenhouse gas emissions from existing facilities in the base year;

(a) Sustainable facilities in the standard year: Average annual greenhouse gas emissions for the standard year of the relevant facilities;

(b) Facilities newly established in the standard year (excluding facilities newly established in the last year of the standard year): the relevant facilities;

Annual greenhouse gas emissions from the year immediately after the year of this establishment to the last year of the base year;

(c) Facilities newly established in the last year of the standard year: The average monthly income of the last year of the relevant facilities in the standard year;

Greenhouse gas emissions (years) by utilizing greenhouse gas emissions: Provided, That a business entity eligible for allocation shall be a business entity eligible for allocation under Article 5 (2).

In cases of submitting documentary evidence under subparagraph 4, three consecutive months following the base year;

It may be calculated as a year (year) greenhouse gas emissions by utilizing average monthly greenhouse gas emissions on the basis of the average greenhouse gas emissions.

(f) Facilities closed in the base year: The amount of greenhouse gas emissions of the relevant facilities shall be calculated as zero.

2. Estimated greenhouse gas emissions from the facilities newly established or expanded;

(a) A anticipated new installation facility: The design capacity of the facility concerned and the anticipated load and low-speed emission intensity of the facility (this shall apply);

In the case of a load rate, operating hours, and emission intensity shall be the flag of similar facilities belonging to the relevant place of business or enterprise.

The results of operation for the last year of the quasi-year shall be utilized: Provided, That the evidence of the enterprise shall be proved pursuant to Article 5 (3) 5.

In the case of submission of data, annual average operation performance for the standard year of the relevant similar facilities may be utilized.

, in case of submitting a separate documentary evidence pursuant to Article 5 (3) 6, when the relevant documentary evidence is presented.

Greenhouse gas emissions expected by multiplying all the operating performance by the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions;

[Attachment 1] Method of Calculating the allocation by company (Articles 10 and 13 related thereto)

(5) The amount of allocation by company for the pertinent compliance year shall be calculated as follows: (a) the amount of allocation by company for the pertinent compliance year shall be anticipated

Standards for greenhouse gas emissions and 2 benmark application facilities for the pertinent compliance year of greenhouse gas emissions expected to be three years;

The adjusted coefficient after excluding the excess greenhouse gas emissions, etc. that have not observed targets as controlled entities in the Do.

shall be calculated by multiplying by e.g.

(1) Estimated greenhouse gas emissions of each compliance year by facilities applying past performance-based infrastructure.

(1) The amount of greenhouse gas emissions for the pertinent compliance year of a facility subject to performance-based application shall be the amount of existing facilities

Estimated greenhouse gas emissions of the compliance year and (2) Estimated installation and extension of facilities for the compliance year;

The total amount of greenhouse gas emissions shall be calculated.

5) Other anticipated greenhouse gas emissions for the pertinent compliance year of the facility.

· An electric power facility of a place of business not separately reported within the base year.

Quantity of greenhouse gas emitted from compliance year

Facilities for the use of power at a place of business not separately reported within the standard year (the relevant facilities);

greenhouse gas emissions expected for the pertinent compliance year of a small-scale discharge facility shall be the same.

Greenhouse gas emissions for the last year of the base year of facilities shall be calculated.

* Provided, That a facility using electric power at a place of business not separately reported within the standard year

Greenhouse gas emissions in the last year of the base year are prepared for annual average greenhouse gas emissions in the base year;

In cases of not more than 50/100, annual average greenhouse gas emissions in the base year shall be anticipated for the pertinent compliance year.

greenhouse gas emissions may be calculated as greenhouse gas emissions.

·To forecast greenhouse gases from the relevant compliance year of power-using facilities separately reported within the base year.

Quantity discharged

Power-using facilities separately reported within the base year shall have continued operation facilities within the base year;

facilities to be newly installed in the reference year, facilities to be expanded within the reference year, and closed facilities within the reference year;

The method of calculating greenhouse gas emissions for the compliance year shall apply.

Where a working group by sector prepares a proposal for determination of allocation to each company pursuant to Article 10, it shall submit it to the head of the Ban without delay.

Article 13 (Preparation of Decision on Allocation by Company) (1) The head of a Ban shall prepare a proposal to comprehensively review and adjust the allocation of allocation to each company submitted by the working group on each sector pursuant to Article 12 in accordance with the following guidelines. In such cases, the detailed method of calculation shall be as specified in attached Table 1:

1. A plan for allocation, a plan for determining allocation by company, matters referred to in the subparagraphs of Article 12 (2) of the Act, and Article 12 (1) of the Decree;

Whether the matters in each subparagraph and are appropriately prepared in accordance with Article 10;

2. The mothers belonging to the relevant type of business recognized by the Joint Working Group on Emission Permits for each type of business determined in the allocation plan;

the adjusted coefficient by year for implementation by type of business, divided by the aggregate of estimated greenhouse gas emissions of the company (in such cases,

The fixed coefficient shall not exceed 1)

3. Other matters considered necessary by the Joint Working Group.

(2) Where the head of a Ban calculates the annual adjustment coefficient by type of business pursuant to paragraph (1) 2, he/she may calculate a separate adjustment coefficient (in such cases, the adjustment coefficient shall not exceed one) for emission facilities of an enterprise belonging to a certain type of business classified by the type of fair emission determined in the allocation plan and the type of greenhouse gas emissions from the use of energy.

(3) Where the head of a Ban prepares a proposal for determination of allocation by company pursuant to paragraph (1), he/she may prepare a proposal for determination of allocation by emission facilities, and in such cases, the adjusted coefficient applicable to each emission facility (in such cases, the adjusted coefficient shall not exceed one) shall be classified by type of business specified in the allocation plan.

(4) Where the head of a Ban prepares a proposal for determination of allocation to each company pursuant to paragraphs (1) through (3), he/she may consider the following:

1. Degree of the improvement of efficiency of emission facilities belonging to business entities eligible for allocation;

2. Whether emission facilities of business entities eligible for allocation fall under special facilities recognized by the Minister of Environment;

Article 14 (Submission of Decision on Allocation by Company) The head of a Ban shall submit to the Minister of Environment a proposal to determine allocation of allocation by company prepared pursuant to Article 13 by three months prior to the beginning of each commitment period (in cases of voluntary participating enterprises and enterprises designated as business entities eligible for allocation, three months prior to the beginning of the compliance year to which emission permits are allocated).

Article 15 (Determination, etc. of Allocation for Each Company) (1) The Minister of Environment shall determine allocation of allocation for each company by consultation with the heads of relevant central administrative agencies and deliberation and coordination by a council of members for deliberation on allocation determination (hereinafter referred to as "deliberation committee for allocation determination") under Article 18 of the Decree with respect to proposals for determination of allocation for each company submitted by the head of the Ban pursuant to Article 14: Provided, That where the deliberative committee on allocation determination fails to adjust, it shall determine allocation for each company after deliberation and coordination by the committee for allocation of emission permits under Article 6 of the Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Committee for Allocation").

(2) Where the Minister of Environment determines the allocation by company pursuant to paragraph (1), he/she shall report to the Allocation Committee: Provided, That this shall not apply where a proposal to determine allocation by company has been adjusted by the Allocation Committee.

(3) When the Minister of Environment determines the allocation of emission permits by business entity pursuant to paragraph (1), he/she shall notify the relevant business entity eligible for allocation of the total emission permits for the pertinent commitment period and the allocation of emission permits by year in electronic form through documents or application system, by no later than two months before the beginning of each commitment period (in cases of a business entity voluntarily participating and a business entity designated as a business entity eligible for allocation as a business entity eligible for allocation, no later than two months before the beginning of the compliance

(4) When the Minister of Environment notifies a business entity eligible for allocation of emission permits for each business entity pursuant to paragraph (3), he/she may prepare procedures for each Do so that the business entity eligible for allocation can verify the allocation of emission permits by its place of business or emission facility through an item of application.

(5) When the Minister of Environment determines the allocation to each company pursuant to paragraph (1), he/she shall indicate the compliance year in which emission permits allocated gratuitously in accordance with the ratio specified in the allocation plan and register the allocation with the account for each company.

Framework Act on Low Carbon, Green Growth

Article 2 (Definitions) The definitions of terms used in this Act shall be as follows:

9. The term "greenhouse gases" means carbon dioxide (CO2), mertan (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrogen (HFCs), hydrogen (HFCs), and mercury;

Carbon (PFCs), Culphane (SF6) and other things prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as redeating heat.

It refers to a substance in a gaseous state in the atmosphere which causes a greenhouse effect by absorption or re-emitting.

10. The term "emission of greenhouse gases" means the emission of greenhouse gases generated as a consequence of human activities into the atmosphere;

Electricity or heat (fuel or electricity) supplied by another person and directly discharging or leaking it;

indirect emission that discharges greenhouse gases by using a heat source (limited to those with a heat source)

means.

Article 42 (Coping with Climate Change and Management of Energy) (1) The Government shall set a long-term and phased target of the matters in each of the following subparagraphs for the purposes of actively responding to the global reduction of greenhouse gases and of efficiently and systematically promoting low carbon, green growth and shall take measures necessary for accomplishing such target:

(2) The Government shall, when it establishes targets under paragraph (1), take into consideration domestic conditions and movements in other countries.

(3) In order to achieve the objectives under paragraph (1), the Government may have each relevant central administrative agency, local government, and public institution prescribed by Presidential Decree, etc. set energy saving and greenhouse gas reduction targets for each relevant institution, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, and may instruct and supervise the performance of such targets.

(4) The Government shall establish targets for each sector, such as industries, traffic, transportation, homes, and commerce, and shall actively prepare measures necessary for accomplishing such targets in order to accomplish targets under paragraph (1) 1 and 2.

(5) The Government shall establish and manage targets for each business entity that emits greenhouse gases and each business entity that consumes energy in excess of the standard quantity prescribed by Presidential Decree (hereinafter referred to as "controlled entity") in a measurable, reported, and verifiable manner in order to accomplish targets under paragraph (1) 1 and 2. In such cases, the Government shall consult with controlled entities in advance and shall take into consideration the past record of emission of greenhouse gases and the use of energy, technical levels, international competitiveness, national targets, etc.

(6) Each controlled entity shall observe targets under paragraph (5) and shall report its performance to the Government, as prescribed by Presidential Decree.

(7) The Government shall keep registers of the results reported pursuant to paragraph (6) and keep the records systematically.

(8) The Government may, if a controlled entity's performance in compliance with an order fails to meet the targets under paragraph (5), issue an order to make necessary improvements for the achievement of targets. In such cases, the controlled entity shall prepare a performance plan under the order to improve and shall perform such plan in good

(9) Each controlled entity shall prepare the results of its performance under paragraph (8) in a method that can be measured, reported, and verified, and report to the Government after verification by a reliable, independent, specialized institution specified by Presidential Decree.

(10) The Government may, if necessary, conduct financial, taxation, management, and technical support, conduct fact-finding surveys and examinations, and provide data and information, so that controlled entities can accomplish targets under paragraph (5) and carry out a performance plan under paragraph (8) without fail.

(1) Except as otherwise expressly provided for in paragraphs (5) through (9), matters necessary for the management of registers, support to controlled entities, and other relevant matters shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Article 44 (Reporting on Quantity of Greenhouse Gases, Quantity of Energy Consumed, etc.) (1) Each controlled entity shall prepare a detailed statement of greenhouse gas emissions and quantity of energy consumption each year for each place of business in a measurable, reported, and verifiable manner and report it to its establishment.

(2) Each controlled entity shall, when it files a report under paragraph (1), receive verification on the reliability of the statement from a reliable, independent, specialized institution. In such cases, the Government may issue an order to correct or supplement any defect or omission, if any, in the statement.

(3) The Government shall manage the statements systematically and may disclose essential information included in the statements of each controlled entity: Provided, That a controlled entity may request the Government to keep the information confidential, if it has any extraordinary reason to believe that such disclosure may significantly infringe on its rights or trade secrets.

(4) When the Government receives a request from controlled entities for non-disclosure of information under the proviso to paragraph (3), it shall organize a meeting of examiners and notify them of the results thereof within 30 days.

(5) Matters necessary for the details, reporting, and management of statements, methods of disclosure, and the composition, operation, etc. of the Examination Committee shall be prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport.

Article 26 (Principle and Roles of Greenhouse Gas and Energy Target Management) (1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on Low Carbon, Green Growth (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 27180, May 24, 2016) (1) The Minister of Environment shall perform the general and coordination functions concerning the establishment and management of greenhouse gas reduction targets and necessary measures.

(2) The Minister of Environment shall prepare comprehensive standards and guidelines for the establishment, management, verification, etc. of targets under Article 42 (5) of the Act in consideration of the advancement of relevant regulations, such as the integration and linkage of greenhouse gas and energy target management, domestic industry conditions, international dynamics, prevention of double regulation, etc. and announce them in the Official Gazette. In such cases, the outcomes shall be deliberated upon by the coordination with the heads of central administrative agencies related to each sector under paragraph (3) (hereinafter referred to as "heads of agencies responsible for each sector") and by the Committee.

/Gu Guidelines on the Operation of Energy Target Management, etc. (wholly amended by the Ministry of Environment No. 2016 - 255 on December 30, 2016)

Article 87 (Methods and Standards for Calculating Emission Quantity, etc.) (1) Each controlled entity shall calculate emission quantities in compliance with the minimum computation levels (Tier) in attached Table 15 according to the size of emission facilities and the types of detailed emission activities. The methods of calculating emission volume of greenhouse gases in this light and the standards for managing each mediating variable shall be as specified in attached Table 16.

(2) Greenhouse gas emissions activities for which detailed methods for calculating greenhouse gas emissions, etc. are not presented in attached Table 16 shall develop their own methods of calculation and calculate greenhouse gas emissions by controlled entities.

(3) Each controlled entity may develop its own method of calculation with a higher accuracy than the method of calculation of greenhouse gas emissions, etc. presented in attached Table 16 and use it for the calculation of greenhouse gas emissions, etc.

[Attachment 16] Detailed methods and criteria for calculation of greenhouse gas emissions by emission activity (related to Article 87)

37. Use of electricity supplied outside;

2. Discharging facilities subject to reporting;

The scope of calculation and reporting of indirect emission from outside supply of electricity shall not be the unit of emission facilities.

It shall be determined by the unit of a place of business: Provided, That buildings for business, waste disposal facilities, and electricity not for the use of product production

With respect to electricity routes which are multi-consumption facilities, the amount of electricity used and the amount of indirect emissions therefrom shall be divided.

calculated and reported. Other power meters (including legal measuring instruments and internal management measuring instruments).

In the case of an emission facility installed, the quantity of electricity used, etc. for each emission facility shall be reported separately.

In such cases, the total amount of electric consumption for each emission facility shall coincide with the total amount of electric consumption per place of business.

of this section.

Administrative Procedures Act

Article 21 (Prior Notice of Dispositions) (1) Where an administrative agency imposes an obligation on a party or imposes a disposition restricting his/her rights and interests, it shall notify the parties, etc. of the following matters in advance:

Article 23 (Presentation of Grounds for Disposition) (1) In rendering a disposition, an administrative agency shall present the grounds and reasons for such disposition to the parties, except in cases falling under any of the following subparagraphs:

1. Where a disposition fully accepts the details of the application as they are;

2. Where a simple, repetitive, or minor disposition is that the parties can clearly understand the reasons.

3. When it is necessary to take an urgent measure. Finally.