석유사업법상 제재처분의 양정 분석

This is a study on discretion in sanctions under the Petreleum And Alternative Fuel Business Act. The above Act prescribes that the competent authorities station may order the petroleum retailer to close the place of business, or to fully or partially suspend his/her petroleum retail business for a fixed period of up to six months about any petroleum retailer’s offence. And the enforcement regulations’ attached [table 1] of the above Act prescribes that the the competent authorities station should order specific sanction according to the violation frequency, and may reduce the sanction to one-half in case of trivial violation etc. I studied the announced sanction cases by KPetro and the decisions of the administrative committees. And I concluded that the competent authorities station have orded sanctions not by using the discretion under the law, but by not using the discretion according to the above [table 1]. By the way, there are many problems in the above [table 1]. First, the above [table 1] reduces the discretion range requested by the above Law. Second, the [table 1] does not consider the disadvantage of the retailer, such as his livelihoods. Third the [table 1] subscribes too abstractly that the officers hesitate to use the discretion permitted by the above the Law. In order to solve the above problems, first, I think that the competent authorities should investigate and study the discretion elements in sanctions, at the national level, not at the individual level. Second, the courts should regulate the above [table 1] by considering the [table 1] not as administration regulation, but as legislative rules. Third, the above [table 1] should be revised in order that the competent authorities officer can consider all the discretion elements such as the retailer’s livelihood, etc.