Plaintiff Co., Ltd. (Attorney Go Young-young, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Head of the Rain Regional Environmental Office

October 10, 2002

Suwon District Court Decision 2001Gu700 delivered on March 22, 2002

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The total costs of a lawsuit shall be borne by each person.

1. Purport of claim

The defendant's disposition of business suspension (the suspension period: February 2, 2001 to March 1, 2001) for January 27, 2001 to the plaintiff shall be revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Details of the disposition;

[Evidence Evidence: Facts without dispute; Gap 1-1, 2, 1-9, 1-1 through 5, 2-2, and 5]

A. The Plaintiff is a company with 1,500 employees who are specialized in planning and supervision in the fields of civil engineering, which is established around January 1, 1966 and carries out planning and supervision of railroads, ports, airports, etc.

B. On January 27, 2001, the Defendant rendered a disposition of the suspension of business for one month (the suspension period: February 2, 2001 to March 1, 2001) against the Plaintiff for the following reasons (hereinafter the instant disposition).

(1) Grounds for Disposition: In preparing an environmental impact assessment report on the first stage construction project of the Incheon International Airport, the Plaintiff shall faithfully perform such assessment duties by intention or gross negligence.

(2) Basic Acts and subordinate statutes: Article 13 of the former Environmental Impact Assessment Act (amended by Act No. 6095, Dec. 31, 1999; Act No. 6095, Jan. 1, 2001); Article 9 of the Enforcement Rule of the Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs No. 115, Dec. 31, 200; Ordinance of the Ministry of Environment No. 103, Dec. 15, 200; Ordinance of the Ministry of Construction and Transportation No. 268

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

Before making a decision on the merits, the record reveals that the court of first instance rendered a decision to suspend the execution of the instant disposition until the court of first instance rendered a decision (the Suwon District Court 2001 A26) on February 8, 2001, and it can be known that the first instance court rendered a decision on March 22, 2002. However, there is no trace of suspending the execution of the said disposition thereafter.

Therefore, the effect of the above decision of stay of execution is to continue to be the effect of the original disposition which was extinguished and temporarily suspended at the time of the decision of the court of first instance. Since it is apparent that the period of suspension of business for one month as prescribed by the above disposition has already been expired after the decision of the court of first instance, the disposition of this case has ceased to be effective because the above period of suspension of business was all imposed, and therefore, in this case, in which there are no special circumstances to see that there is a violation of any legal interest of the plaintiff due to the remaining appearance of the above disposition of suspension of business, the interest of the lawsuit of this case has been extinguished while the trial of this case is pending

3. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed as illegal, so the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Judges Lee Young-young (Presiding Judge) and Kim Jong-dae