2012 Doz. 4876 Revocation of a Conditional License for Marine Passenger Transport Services

1. Korea Forest Shipping Corporation;

2. Chemical Shipping Co., Ltd.

Commissioner of the Regional Maritime Affairs and Port Office

April 4, 2013

May 2, 2013

1. The lawsuit of this case against the plaintiff Samsung Shipping Co., Ltd. shall be dismissed.

2. On September 20, 2012, the Defendant’s conditional licensing disposition for passenger transport services in the year related to the route between the Hani-Boo-U.S. and the Hani-U.S. shall be revoked.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit, the part arising between the Plaintiff, Han Maritime Shipping and the Defendant is borne by the Defendant, while the part arising between the Plaintiff, Han Maritime Shipping and the Defendant is borne by the Plaintiff, Samsung Maritime Shipping Co.

4. The licensing disposition stated in paragraph 2 shall be suspended until the judgment of this case becomes final and conclusive.

Plaintiff Han Forestry Shipping Co., Ltd.: as set forth in paragraph (2) of this Article.

Plaintiff Samsung New Shipping Co., Ltd.: the Defendant revoked the conditional licensing of the maritime passenger transport services on the service route between the Hagu and Hagu-U.S. on September 20, 2012.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiffs are corporations established for the purpose of marine passenger transportation business and cargo transportation business for the plaintiffs, and the defendant, the defendant, the defendant, the Samsung New Shipping Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiff Samsung New Shipping") has a license for marine passenger transportation business for the sea route between the water and the water (the port of call: the system, the dog, the self-swingdo, the transmission house, the plaintiff, hereinafter referred to as the "existing Paragraph 1 route of this case"). The plaintiff Han Han Han Shipping Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiff Han Hanyang Shipping") has a license for marine passenger transportation business for the sea route between the water and the water (the port of call: the river, the oil supply, the safe map, the notice, the railroad station, the station, and the hereinafter referred to as the "existing Paragraph 2 route of this case") and the new weather (the port of port of call: the May 1, 200, the hereinafter referred to as the "existing Paragraph 3 of this case").

B. On September 20, 2012, the Defendant granted a license for marine passenger transport services to the Kuo Shipping Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Seoo Shipping”) for the following conditional maritime passenger transport services (hereinafter referred to as the “new service route of this case”) with respect to the so-called Kuo Shipping Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Seoo Shipping”).

Maritime service route: 5 kings per day in case of a ship operated by bagbs (port port: bag): Lone Starheading (100 tons and roadways): 5 kings per day.

Conditional License Period: The fact that there is no dispute over September 20, 2013 (the time limit for securing ships, landing facilities and convenience facilities) (the grounds for recognition), the entry of evidence No. 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Judgment on the defendant's main defense

A. The defendant's main defense

In order for the plaintiffs to issue a new license on the new sea route of this case, the existing sea route of this case constitutes the sea route which is considered as the same as the new sea route of this case, and thus, the defendant must meet the transport demand criteria prescribed in Article 4 (1) of the former Enforcement Rule of the Marine Transportation Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs No. 540, Nov. 30, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply). Although the gold Shipping's marine passenger transport services do not meet this, the defendant filed a lawsuit of this case seeking revocation of the disposition of this case by asserting that there was an error of law that the defendant issued a new license on the new sea route of this case to the Gold Shipping and abused its discretionary power by issuing a new license on the new sea route of this case, the defendant cannot be said to have violated any legal interests protected by the disposition of this case, because it is not directly related to the disposition of this case and is not related to gold Shipping.

B. Determination

1) A third party, who is not the other party to an administrative disposition, is entitled to a decision of the propriety thereof by filing an administrative litigation seeking the revocation or nullification of the administrative disposition, where the interests protected by law are infringed by the pertinent administrative disposition, and the term "legal interests" refers to cases where there are individual, direct, and specific interests protected by the relevant laws and regulations and regulations, and in general, where the law, which forms the basis of the beneficial administrative disposition, such as a license or authorization, is aimed at preventing unreasonable management due to excessive competition among the pertinent enterprisers, the existing business entity, who is conducting a business by obtaining a beneficial administrative disposition such as a license, authorization, permission, etc. against another business entity, is entitled to seek the revocation of the relevant administrative disposition, even if the other party to the administrative disposition is not the other party to the administrative disposition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Du10512, Jun. 10, 2010).

구 해운법(2012. 2. 17. 법률 제11321호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제4조 제1항, 제5조 제1항 제1호에 의하면, 해상여객운송사업을 경영하는 자는 항로마다 면허를 받아야 하고, 이때 신규 면허기준의 하나로 국토해양부령으로 정하는 수송수요 기준에 알맞을 것을 요구하고 있는바, 이와 같이 항로마다 면허를 받도록 하는 취지는 해상운송의 질서유지와 공정경쟁이 이루어지도록 하고, 선박이 운항하는 당해 항로에 대한 안전성, 편의성을 심사하도록 하여 여객의 원활한 운송을 도모함으로써 해운업의 건전한 발전과 이용자의 편의를 향상시키고자 함에 있다고 할 것이므로(대법원 2009. 1, 15, 선고 2008두17868 판결 등 참조), 새로운 면허로 인하여 기존의 해상여객운송사업자의 항로와 새로운 항로가 일부 중복되게 되고 기존업자의 수익감소가 예상된다면, 기존의 해상여객운송사업자와 새로 면허를 발급받는 해상여객운송사업자는 경업 관계에 있는 것으로 봄이 상당하다 할 것이어서 기존의 해상여객운송사업자에게 새로운 해상여객운송사업 면허의 취소를 구할 법률상의 이익이 있다고 할 것이다(대법원 2002. 10. 25. 선고 2001 | 4450 판결 취지 참조).

2) The closing point of the Plaintiff’s new service route of this case (the existing service route of this case) is the same as the closing point of the new service route of this case. However, in addition to the whole purport of pleadings as the facts that there is no dispute between the parties, the existing service route of this case does not resist the starting point and the port of the new service route of this case. The new service route of this case also does not resist the existing service route of the first service route of this case. The starting point of the new service route of this case and the service route of this case cannot be viewed as the service route of this case, since the new service route of this case cannot be viewed as the plaintiff’s new service route of this case cannot be viewed as the service route of this case or the existing service route of this case. Thus, the plaintiff’s new service route of this case cannot be viewed as the service route of this case because the existing service route of this case cannot be viewed as the service route of this case.

3) Whether the plaintiff's plaintiff's plaintiff's plaintiff's plaintiff's qualification (the existing paragraphs 2 and 3 of this case) is eligible

A) As to the existing Paragraph 2 street of this case

In addition to the purport of Gap evidence 7-3's statement and video, the closing point of the new sea route of this case is about 4.7 km between the port of call (Ycheon) and the port of call (Ycheoncheon) of this case, and about 8 minutes of the new sea route of this case are acknowledged, but the parties do not resist the starting point and port of the new sea route of this case, and the new sea route of this case cannot be seen as being used as the new sea route of this case since it is difficult to view the new sea route of this case as the new sea route of this case's new sea route of this case's Paragraph 2 of this case's 2 of this case's new sea route of this case's new sea route of this case's 2 of this case's new sea route of this case's 2 of this case's new sea route of this case's 2 of this case's new sea route of this case's 2 of this case's new sea route of this case's 2 of this case's case's new sea route of this case's 2 of this case's new sea route of this case'

B) As to the existing Paragraph 3 street of this case

In addition to the purport of Gap evidence 7-3's statement and video, the starting point of the new service route of this case and the port point of the existing service route of the existing service route of this case of this case of this case of paragraph (3) of this case of this case of about five minutes, and the closing point of the new service route of this case of this case and the existing service route of paragraph (3) of this case of this case of this case are about 4.7 km at about eight minutes, and it is recognized that the village bus is operated. Since the existing service route of this case of this case and the new service route of this case are located near each other, it is reasonable to see that the new service route of this case is in the relation of gold Shipping and light business.

C) Sub-determination

Therefore, the plaintiff Han Maritime Transportation is recognized as eligible to seek the cancellation of the disposition of this case, since it is deemed that there is a benefit legally infringed by the disposition of this case.

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff Han Gan Shipping's assertion

1) The existing Paragraph 3 of this case constitutes a sea route considered to be the same route as the new route of this case, and thus, in order for the defendant to issue a new license on the new route of this case, it must meet the transport demand and criteria prescribed in Article 4 (1) of the Enforcement Rule of the former Marine Transportation Act. Although the gold Shipping's marine passenger transport service fails to meet this, the defendant issued a new license on the new route of this case to gold Shipping, it is erroneous in the disposition of this case where the

2) Due to the instant disposition, there are problems, such as the decrease in the profits of Plaintiff Korea Forest Shipping and the inconvenience of users, etc., due to the instant disposition, and it is difficult to view that the Kui Shipping completed the entire mooring facilities of the vessel.

3) Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful by deviating from and abusing discretionary power.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) Determination as to whether the existing Paragraph 3 route of this case constitutes a route considered as the same as the new route of this case

A) First, as to whether the part or whole of the port of call is geographically adjacent and thus it is possible to substitute, the starting point of the new service route of this case and the port of the port of the existing service route of this case of this case of paragraph 3 of this case are required for about five minutes, and the end point of the new service route of this case and the end point of the existing service route of paragraph 3 of this case are about 4.7 km on the ground, and about eight minutes on the ground, and the fact that the village bus is operated is equal as seen earlier. Thus, the new service route of this case and the existing service route of paragraph 3 of this case are able to substitute use by geographically adjacent to all or part of the port of the port of this case.

B) Furthermore, as to whether the main user of the passenger ship in question overlaps or is expected to overlap, the following circumstances, i.e., the main user using the existing paragraph 3 of this case, is a tourist, and the main user of the existing paragraph 3 of this case through the defendant also stated that the head user of the existing paragraph 3 of this case is a non-intersection tourist, as the starting point and arrival point of the sloping road No. 1 course, which is the closing point of the new service route of this case. The new service route of this case is expected to be the main user, and the new service route of this case and the new service route of this case are expected to overlap or overlap with the previous paragraph 3 of this case, in light of the fact that the new service route of this case and the new service route of this case can be selected by the mobile route users, it is reasonable to deem that the new service route of this case overlap or overlap with the previous service route of this case.

C) Accordingly, the existing Paragraph 3 of this case constitutes a route considered as the same route as the new route of this case.

2) Determination as to whether the transport demand criteria are met

Since the existing Paragraph 3 of this case constitutes a sea route considered as the same route as the new route of this case, the average transport revenue rate (the ratio of the estimated revenue based on maximum transport capacity and the actual transport capacity) of the total passenger ships already operated under the existing Paragraph 3 of this case under Article 4(1) of the former Enforcement Rule of the Marine Transportation Act shall be at least 25/100 of the total passenger ships of this case, which are newly applied for a license, shall be included in the passenger ships of this case.

Unless there are special circumstances in administrative litigation, an administrative agency should assert and prove the legality of the pertinent administrative disposition. The evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to recognize that the average transport revenue rate (the rate based on the estimated import amount based on the maximum transport capacity and the actual transport capacity) of the entire passenger ship already placed under the existing paragraph (3) of this case includes a new license, even if it includes a passenger ship of the relevant maritime passenger transport service, 25/100 or more, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

3) Sub-decisions

Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful without examining the remaining arguments of the Plaintiff Han Maritime Transportation.

4. Suspension of execution.

In full view of the records of this case, it is recognized that the execution of the disposition of this case was urgently needed to prevent damage that may be caused to Plaintiff Han-do and Shipping, and otherwise, it constitutes a case where suspension of execution is likely to have a significant impact on public welfare due to suspension of execution. Therefore, the disposition of this case shall be suspended ex officio until the judgment of this case becomes final and conclusive.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case by the plaintiff Samsung Shipping is dismissed as it is unlawful, and the claim of this case by the plaintiff Han Maritime Transportation is justified, and it is decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge, Kim Jae-young

Judges Hong Young-jin

Judges Park Young-young

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.