[1] The legal nature of the toll payment notice received by driving a toll without inspection (=collection disposition)

[2] The case holding that the Korea Highway Corporation has the right to collect tolls from the sub-sections between sub-sections

[3] The case holding that the defects falling under the grounds for revocation in the public notice of tolls imposing the obligation of tolls do not succeed to the notice of tolls as the disposition of collection

[1] According to the provisions of Articles 8 and 10 of the former Toll Road Act (amended by Act No. 6403 of Jan. 29, 2001), the specific obligation to pay tolls for vehicles driving on a toll road is a disposition that demands the payment of tolls for the purpose of compulsory collection as part of the compulsory collection of tolls, if only the fact that the obligation to pay tolls is a public announcement of the road management authority that imposes the obligation to pay tolls on the general public of the vehicles driving on the toll road and the act of passing the toll road on the toll road for the vehicle, the obligation to pay tolls is immediately established without the need to separate a disposition to impose the toll. Since the payment of tolls for vehicles driving on a toll without the payment of tolls is to be collected in the same manner as national taxes are delinquent, the obligation to pay tolls is a disposition that demands the payment of tolls

[2] The case holding that the Korea Highway Corporation has the right to collect tolls from the sub-sections between sub-sections

[3] The case holding that the defects falling under the grounds for revocation in the public announcement of tolls imposing the obligation of tolls do not succeed to the notification of tolls as a disposition of collection

[1] [1] Article 8 (see current Article 15), Article 10 (see current Article 19), Article 8 of the Enforcement Decree of the Toll Road Act, Article 23 of the National Road Act / [2] Article 5 and Article 6 of the National Expressways Act, Article 73 of the Road Act, Article 2 (3) of the former Toll Road Act (amended by Act No. 6403 of Jan. 29, 2001), Article 3 (1) 1 (see current Article 40 (1) 1), Article 3 (2) of the former Toll Road Act (amended by Act No. 6403 of Jan. 29, 200), Article 10 (2) of the former Toll Road Act (see current Article 40 (1) 1), Article 3 (3) of the former Toll Road Act (amended by Act No. 6401 of Jan. 1, 200), Article 19 (2) of the former Toll Road Act (see current Article 9 (2) of the former Toll Road Act)

Plaintiff 1 and two others (Attorneys Noh Jeong-hee et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Korea Highway Corporation (Attorney Don-Jap et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

1. The plaintiffs' primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

On February 4, 1999, the defendant confirmed that the toll payment notice disposition against the plaintiffs on February 4, 199 is null and void. In addition, the above disposition is revoked.

1. Basic facts

Plaintiff 1 driving a vehicle on February 2, 199 at around 14:26 (Automobile Number 1 omitted), Plaintiff 2 driving a vehicle on the same day at around 14:27 (Automobile Number 2 omitted) and Plaintiff 3 received a notice of payment (limited to the portion equivalent to KRW 1,000 among tolls) that the sum of KRW 3,000, which is the sum of KRW 1,000, which is the 4th day of each Defendant’s Vice Head of Local Headquarters and KRW 2,000, which is the 18th day of the same month, in driving a vehicle on the same day at around 14:27 (automobile Number 2 omitted), and Plaintiff 3 did not pay tolls as prescribed in the Toll Road Act, on the grounds that he did not pay tolls as provided by the Toll Road Act.

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

The plaintiffs, as the primary claim, are the notification of the payment of tolls of this case, under the name of the head of the regional headquarters of the defendant, and the right to impose tolls of the toll road including the national expressway is owned by the road management agency. Since the road management agency is the Minister of Construction and Transportation, the right to impose tolls of the national expressway is not reasonable and there is no provision that the right to impose tolls is delegated by the Minister of Construction and Transportation. Accordingly, even if the defendant paid the notification of the payment under the name of the head of the regional headquarters of this case, the notification of the payment of tolls of this case is based on a person without the authority to dispose of the tolls of this case. The notification of this case was made by the head of the regional headquarters of this case, which is a mere employee of the defendant, and the notification of the payment of toll road of this case was made under the premise that the construction of the above section of this case would be invalid and thus, the notification of this case was made under the premise that the new section of this case would be invalid and thus, the new section of this case would not be restored to 9.

B. Relevant statutes

National Expressways Act

Article 5 (Management Office of National Expressways) The Office of Construction and Transportation shall be the Minister of Construction and Transportation.

(1) The Minister of Construction and Transportation may have the Korea Highway Corporation vicariously execute part of his authority on the national expressways as prescribed by this Act, the Road Act and other Acts related to roads under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree.

(2) In case where the Korea Highway Corporation vicariously executes the authority of the Minister of Construction and Transportation concerning the motorway under the provisions of paragraph (1), within the scope of acting as proxy, application of this Act, the Road Act and other Acts related to roads shall

Enforcement Decree of the Motorway

(1) Under the provisions of Article 6 (1) of the Act, the Minister of Construction and Transportation may have the Korea Highway Corporation vicariously exercise his authority on the national expressways as prescribed in Articles 8 and 9 (2) and (3) of the Act and the text of Articles 24, 29 through 32, 35, 38, 40, 42, 43, 45, 48, 49, 50 (5) and (6), 52 through 54, 54-4, 54-5, 62 through 67, 69 (2), 73 through 75, and 78 through 80 of the Road Act.

(2) When the Minister of Construction and Transportation intends to have the Korea Highway Corporation vicariously exercise his authority under the provisions of paragraph (1), he shall publicly announce in advance the name of the routes and the contents and period of the authority to vicariously execute the said national expressway.

The Road Act

Article 73 (Reversion of Charges, etc.) (2) Tolls, occupation fees and other revenues concerning roads shall go to the National Treasury for roads managed by the Minister of Construction and Transportation, and the revenues accruing from roads managed by any management agency other than the Minister of Construction and Transportation shall be the revenues of the local government that belongs to the management agency: Provided, That the tolls referred to in Article

Toll Road Act

Article 2 (Definitions) (3) The term "right to manage a toll road" in this Act means the right to maintain and manage a toll road and collect tollss, occupation charges, etc. from those who drive or use a toll road.

Article 3 (Installation of Toll Roads) (1) A road management authority may construct or upgrade a road falling under any of the following subparagraphs and collect a charge (hereinafter referred to as " tolls") from a person who passes through or uses such road:

1. A road, the traffic of which is remarkably beneficial to any person driving through or using such road;

(3) The road management authority may require the non-road management authority to collect the tolls and to maintain and manage the toll roads established pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2) on his/her behalf, as prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Article 8 (Collection of Tolls, etc.) (1) The tolls under the provisions of Article 3 (1) and (2) shall be collected from the vehicles driving on the toll road concerned: Provided, That this shall not apply to military operations vehicles, ambulances, rescue and fire-fighting vehicles, and other vehicles prescribed by the Presidential Decree.

(2) The road management agency may collect the tolls in arrears under paragraph (1) in the same manner as delinquent national taxes are collected, as prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Article 10 (Public Notice of Amount and Collection Period of Tolls) When a road management authority intends to collect tolls, it shall publicly announce the amount, collection period, collection method, and other necessary matters in the Official Gazette or Official Gazette, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, and install a sign indicating the details thereof at a place easily visible to the public on the road. The same shall apply to any change in the amount, collection period, collection method, collection method, etc. of tolls.

Article 12 (Construction of Toll Roads by Non-Road Management Office) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 34 of the Road Act, any person other than the road management office may perform the construction or reconstruction of a road meeting the requirements of Article 3 (1) and (2) at his own expense with permission from the relevant road management office as prescribed by the Presidential Decree and collect tolls.

Article 14 (Reversion of Tolls, Occupancy Fees, and Other Revenues concerning Toll Roads Collected pursuant to this Act and the Road Act, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 73 (2) of the Road Act, shall belong to the National Treasury if the Minister of Construction and Transportation collects them, to the local road management office, and to the revenue of the local government if such tolls are collected by the local road management office: Provided, That the tolls as referred to in Article 12

Enforcement Decree of Toll Road Act

When a road management authority intends to authorize a non-road management authority to collect tolls and to maintain and manage toll roads on its behalf pursuant to Article 3 (3) of the Toll Road Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), it shall submit documents stating the following matters to the Minister of Construction and Transportation for approval:

1. Kinds of roads and route names;

2. Point, terminal point and important passage; and

3. Date of permission to build a toll road;

4. Amount and collection period of tolls;

5. The annual plan for repayment of principal and interest for the repayment of construction expenses;

6. Results of collection of tolls;

7. Grounds for vicarious execution of authority and incidental conditions.

8. Names of agents for authority and locations of their offices;

Article 8 (Public Announcement of Collection of Tolls) (1) When a road management authority intends to collect tolls, it shall publicly notify in advance the following matters in the Official Gazette or daily newspapers pursuant to Article 10 of the Act:

1. A collector of a toll;

2. Names of facilities or sections of toll roads;

3. Period for collecting tolls;

4. Object of collecting tolls and the amount thereof;

5. Vehicles or drivers who are exempted from tolls;

6. Methods of collecting tolls;

7. The fact that roads falling under Article 3 (1) 2 of the Act may be used.

The Korea Highway Corporation

Article 6 (Investments of Rights to Manage Toll Roads) (1) The State may contribute to the Corporation the right to manage toll roads.

(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of the main sentence of Article 24 (1) of the Road Act and Article 12 of the Toll Road Act, the Corporation may build, upgrade and manage the toll roads after obtaining permission under Article 4 of the Toll Road Act as prescribed by the Presidential Decree.

(2) When the Corporation constructs, rebuilds or manages a toll road under paragraph (1), it may exercise the authority of the road management authority under the Road Act on its behalf as prescribed by the Presidential Decree.

(3) The Minister of Construction and Transportation may, notwithstanding the provisions of the main sentence of Article 24 (1) of the Road Act and Article 10 of the Motorway Act, have the construction work executed and managed with respect to the construction, reconstruction, maintenance and repair of roads decided on a toll road at his cost under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree.

(4) Where a road, the execution and management of which are executed and managed by the construction of a toll road under paragraph (3), collects the tolls after becoming a toll road, the expenses required for the execution and management of the construction of the toll road shall be deemed to be the expenses required for the construction, reconstruction, maintenance, repair and other management of the toll road in the application of Article 9 (2) of the Toll Road

(5) When the Minister of Construction and Transportation executes and manages road works under paragraph (3), he may have the authority of road management authorities under the Road Act and the Motorway Act execute and manage the said works on his behalf.

(c) Markets:

(1) Facts of recognition

(A) Evidence Nos. 7-1 through 3, evidence Nos. 1 and 13-1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 6, Eul evidence Nos. 11-1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 12, fact-finding for the Minister of Construction and Transportation of party members, results of fact-finding for the Minister of Construction and Transportation, the whole purport of oral argument

(A) At the time of November 3, 1989, the Defendant, from the Construction Division, the road management authority, obtained permission to rebuild the toll road for the extension of the sub-sections, commenced the extension of the sub-sections. Accordingly, on January 4, 1990, the Minister of Construction and Transportation issued a public notice on the modification of the road zone of the sub-sections extended to the sixth line due to the above extension construction work under the Construction Division No. 809 on January 4, 1990. On July 18, 1992, on the two materials, the extension of the eight lines was completed under the Construction Division No. 1992-87 on July 18, 1992, issued a public notice on the adjustment of the tolls including the toll road of the sub-sections from the two materials, which were the free sections, to the toll collection section of the sub-sections, and thereafter, the Minister of Construction and Transportation introduced the minimum adjustment rate of the sub-sections as the minimum (l.00).

(B) On the other hand, on February 10, 1969, September 29 of the same year, December 10 of the same year, and July 1, 1976, the government invested in kind to the defendant the structure of the expressway and the right to use the toll road. On May 9, 1980, the Minister of Construction and Transportation as of May 9, 1980 approved the consolidated collection of the tolls for the motorway under Article 9(3) of the Toll Road Act and Article 7(3) of the Enforcement Decree thereof, and publicly announced it under Article 57 of the Construction 20.

(2) Determination:

(A) As to the nature of the notice of payment in this case, according to the provisions of Article 8 and Article 10 of the Toll Road Act, the specific obligation to pay tolls for vehicles driving on the toll road is established immediately without the need to impose any separate tolls if the road management authority imposed the obligation to pay tolls for the general vehicle driving on the road and the act of driving on the toll road for the vehicle without the payment of tolls, and the obligation to pay tolls for the vehicle driving on the toll without the payment of tolls is to be collected in the same manner as national taxes are national taxes are in arrears. Thus, in this case, the Plaintiffs’ obligation to pay tolls of KRW 1,000, each of the above 1,000, the obligation to pay tolls for the above 1,000,000,000 won, including the above 192-87 of the Construction Part of July 18, 1992, and the amount of tolls for the above 1,000,000 won, shall be determined as part of the notice of payment in arrears.

(B) On the first argument of the plaintiffs, the first argument of the plaintiffs should be considered first.

As seen above, the Minister of Construction and Transportation has the authority to pay the toll on the highway. The Minister of Construction and Transportation has the authority to collect the toll on the highway under the provision of Article 3 (1) of the Toll Road Act. According to the provision of Article 5 of the Toll Road Act, the Minister of Construction and Transportation has the authority to collect the toll on his/her own to collect the toll on his/her own under the provision of Article 9 of the Enforcement Decree of the Road Act, and the Minister of Construction and Transportation has the authority to collect the toll on his/her own to collect the toll on his/her own under the provision of Article 3 (1) of the Road Act. According to the provision of Article 9 of the Act, the Minister shall provide that the Defendant shall collect the toll on his/her own as the Minister of Construction and Transportation on his/her own under the provision of Article 9 of the Act on the Construction and Transportation and the provision of Article 9 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Construction and Transportation on his/her own, and the Minister shall also provide that the Defendant shall separately collect the toll on his/her behalf.

Furthermore, as seen earlier, the notice of this case was made in the name of the director of the Central District Headquarters of the defendant, not the defendant, but the director of the Central District Headquarters of the defendant's Central District Headquarters has the authority to conduct all judicial or extra-judicial actions with respect to the defendant's business as the defendant's representative under Article 11 of the Korea Highway Corporation Act, so the notification of this case can be deemed to have been made by the

Therefore, the notification of this case is a legitimate disposition based on the defendant's disposition authority. Thus, the plaintiffs' assertion that there is a defect in the disposition authority of the notification of this case is without merit.

(C) Next, with respect to the second argument by the plaintiffs, the construction work of the construction department of July 18, 1992, which is the premise for the payment notice of this case, is not a reconstruction of the Toll Road Act that can pay for the road, and even if it falls under the family reconstruction work, the reason that the construction work of the Toll Road Act did not go through the consultation of the Toll Road Deliberation Committee, the reason that the construction work of the Toll Road Act did not go through the consultation of the Toll Road Deliberation Committee, and the reason that it violates the above construction department announcement and the principle of trust, equality and proportionality cannot be deemed to be a serious and obvious defect to the extent that the payment notice of this case would be null and void. Thus, the above argument by the plaintiffs is without merit.

3. Determination on the conjunctive claim

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

The plaintiffs asserted that, as alleged earlier, even if the notice of payment in this case was not null and void, the above section does not fall under the reconstruction of the Toll Road Act that allows the expanded construction of the toll road to pay for the road, and it does not fall under the reconstruction of the toll road. In addition, even if it falls under the family reconstruction work, the above section was not subject to the public notice of construction prescribed in the Toll Road Act and consultation with the Toll Road Deliberation Committee. In addition, the payment of the above section is in violation of the principle of equality and equity in application of the Act as a result of receiving only the toll from the time of the entry into the road from the time of the Gyeong-dong Yol-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-car road to pay the toll road. Furthermore, the payment of the toll in this case is unduly excessive in light of the toll and the level of recovery of the road construction facilities of other motorways. Thus, the plaintiffs' payment notice imposing the toll 1,000 won on the above section is unlawful.

(b) Markets:

On the other hand, this case's notice of payment does not include a disposition of collection of tolls which causes the plaintiffs to pay tolls, but also a disposition of collection of tolls for which specific obligation has already been determined by the plaintiffs' toll road traffic. The reason for illegality as the plaintiffs' preliminary claim is already the same as the above. The notice of payment in this case's notice of collection is not the defect itself of the collection disposition, but the notice of collection of tolls for the general vehicle driving on the motorway between the above Yang Jae-Seoul and the general vehicle driving on the motorway. The above portion is included in the collection of tolls in the collection of tolls, and the payment of tolls in this case's notice of July 18, 192 and the above portion is KRW 1,00,000, not the above notice of payment in this case's notice of payment in this case's notice of payment in this case's notice of payment in this case's notice of payment in this case's notice of payment in this case's notice of payment in this case's notice of payment in this case's separate from the above one's own claim.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' primary and conjunctive claims of this case are dismissed as they are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Jin Jin-Jin (Presiding Judge)