Whether mixing of other petroleum products, such as light oil, with normal gasoline, constitutes pseudo petroleum products (affirmative)

In the case of pseudo petroleum products under Article 22(2) of the former Petroleum Business Act (amended by Act No. 5092 of Dec. 29, 1995), the mixture of other petroleum products, such as normal gasoline oil and light oil, shall be included. Thus, the pertinent gasoline sold by a petroleum selling business entity entrusted by the company concerned by mixing gasoline, which is a petroleum product, with other petroleum products, constitutes pseudo petroleum products under Article 22(2) of the former Petroleum Business Act.

Article 2 Subparag. 2 of the Petroleum Business Act, Article 22(2) of the former Petroleum Business Act (amended by Act No. 5092 of Dec. 29, 1995) (see current Article 26), Article 24 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Petroleum Business Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 15230 of Dec. 31, 1996) (see current Article 30)

Supreme Court Decision 88Nu461 Decided July 25, 1989 (Gong1989, 1304), Supreme Court Decision 91Nu3710 Decided August 13, 1991 (Gong1991, 2370), Supreme Court Decision 91Nu13106 Decided February 25, 1992 (Gong192, 1188), Supreme Court Decision 96Nu14128 Decided July 8, 1997 (Gong197Ha, 2396)

Han-Energy Co., Ltd.

Guns of the Armed Forces

Daegu High Court Decision 96Gu10776 delivered on August 28, 1997

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu High Court.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, pursuant to Article 22 (2) of the former Petroleum Business Act (amended by Act No. 5092 of Dec. 29, 195) and Article 24 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 15230 of Dec. 31, 1996), the court below held that the non-party 1, who was delegated by the Plaintiff with the instant petroleum sales business, sells petroleum products by mixing them with petroleum products such as similar gasoline, such as combustion, additives, or mixing them with other petrochemicals, can be used as fuel for gasoline combustion engines. The court below held that the non-party 1's disposition of this case was unlawful since the non-party 1's assertion that the non-party 1 sold similar gasoline was not a ground for the above disposition of suspension of the business.

However, pseudo petroleum products under Article 22(2) of the former Petroleum Business Act include mixing of other petroleum products, such as light oil or light oil, with normal gasoline (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 88Nu461, Jul. 25, 1989; 91Nu3710, Aug. 13, 1991; 91Nu13106, Feb. 25, 1992; 96Nu14128, Jul. 8, 197). Accordingly, the instant gasoline sold by Nonparty 1, who was delegated by the Plaintiff, cannot be deemed to constitute pseudo petroleum products under Article 22(2) of the former Petroleum Business Act.

The court below's decision to oppose the above purport is erroneous in interpreting the former Petroleum Business Act, and such illegality of the court below has affected the conclusion of the judgment. The grounds for appeal are with merit.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Yong-hun (Presiding Justice)