Where the application for the establishment of mining rights for the same kind of mineral in the same area overlaps, even if the application for the establishment of mining rights for the crew no longer exists due to the extinguishment of the mining rights for the crew thereafter, it is reasonable to

Where the application for the establishment of mining rights for the same kind of mineral overlaps in the same area, the seafarer shall take precedence over the application, even though the permitted mining rights for the seafarer no longer exist in the overlapping application due to the extinguishment of the mining rights.

Article 20 of the Mining Industry Act

Supreme Court Decision 64Nu11 Decided September 8, 1964

Plaintiff

Minister of Commerce and Energy

Seoul High Court Decision 69Gu36 delivered on December 9, 1969

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

If the application area overlaps with the mining area of the same kind of mineral at the time of the application, the application area for the mining of the same mineral shall not be permitted. Article 22 of the Mining Industry Act provides that while the above application area overlaps with the mining area of the same kind of mineral, even if the above application area overlaps with the mining area of the same kind of mineral, the non-permission disposition shall be made at the beginning of the above time (see Supreme Court Decision 64Nu11 delivered on September 8, 1964). It seems that the non-permission of the above application area overlaps with the non-party 9 on the ground that the non-party 6 application area overlaps with the above non-party 9 on the ground that the non-party 9 application area would have no effect on the non-party 1, the non-party 6 application area would have no effect on the non-party 9 on the non-party 1, the court below's decision that the non-party 9 application area would have no effect on the non-party 1, the non-party 9, therefore, should be interpreted in light of the purport of the foregoing Act.

Therefore, the original judgment shall be reversed and the original judgment shall be re-examined. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

The presiding judge of the Supreme Court of Korea (Presiding Judge) shall be the red net shots and the white shots