1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal, including the part arising from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the part concerning the 5th sentence through 12th sentence of the court of first instance concerning the 19th sentence, and the part concerning the 13th through 11th sentence of the court of first instance concerning the 5th sentence as stated in paragraph (2). In addition to adding the Act and subordinate statutes to the "related Acts and subordinate statutes" of the court of first instance, it is the same as the entry of the grounds of the judgment of first instance in addition to adding the Act and subordinate statutes to the "related Acts and subordinate statutes" of the court of first instance

2. The part after completion of construction is 【(5) to 19(5) of the Fisheries Act’s partial interpretation that takes into account Article 9 and Article 13 of the Fisheries Act’s systematic interpretation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9(4) of the Fisheries Act’s provision on the exclusion of this case’s application).

(3) Article 13(1) through (3) of the Fisheries Act (hereinafter “the instant order provision”) is not itself a basis statute of the instant return disposition, but a provision that infringes on the Plaintiff’s property right, and is derived from apparent legislative errors, and is unconstitutional as it violates the excessive prohibition principle, trust protection principle, etc.

) With the exclusion of the application of the Fisheries Mediation Committee’s own deliberation alone, the Intervenor was decided on the priority order designating the Plaintiff as the first-class fishery license holder and the second-class fishery license holder, and the return of this case was rendered to the Plaintiff. However, in the event that the instant provision is unconstitutional, the Plaintiff and Intervenor Hodo fishing village fraternity constitute the priority order pursuant to Article 13(1)1 of the Fisheries Act among the Plaintiff and Intervenor Hodo fishing village fraternity pursuant to Article 13(1)1 of the Fisheries Act (Article 13(8) of the Fisheries Act).