The grounds for collecting user fees from a river occupant for the purpose of gathering earth and sand;

The river usage fee imposed on a person with special usage relationship of river occupancy for the purpose of gathering earth and sand shall also be the "user fee" under the provisions of Article 130 of the Local Autonomy Act.

Articles 25 and 33 of the River Act, Article 130 of the Local Autonomy Act

Attorney Cha Young-young, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Attorney Kim Jong-young, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 74Gu180 delivered on May 18, 1976

The appeal is dismissed.

Costs of appeal lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, as long as a river has been designated by the River Act, it becomes a public facility such as a road as prescribed by the Road Act or a harbor as prescribed by the Harbor Act (or an expression of public material in school) and its management agency may collect comments or remunerations from a person who specially uses public facilities under the Act, as long as the river has been designated by the River Act, and it can be viewed as a "user fee" under Article 130 of the Local Autonomy Act, since it is called as a "user fee", which has the nature of a special use of public facilities, which is called as a "user fee" under Article 130 of the Local Autonomy Act, so the above opinion of the court below is just, and it cannot be said that there is no error of law such as a violation of the legal principles as the novel, a incomplete hearing, or a omission of judgment.

Therefore, this appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)