Administrative Litigation | A Judgment Finding the Imposition of a Large Water Bill Caused by a Pipe Leak at an Unstaffed Workplace to Be a "Lawful Imposition"

The plaintiff that filed the administrative litigation was Korea Electric Power Corporation (hereinafter "KEPCO"), which in October of last year was billed 69.95 million won in water charges by the waterworks office.

During this period, there was no staff stationed at the KEPCO workplace, so no on-site meter reading was carried out, and the charges were calculated based on the most recent record, the usage figure from August of the previous year. Later, when a sharp increase in usage was confirmed in October, charges for fourteen months were imposed all at once.

This was caused by a leak that occurred in the piping beneath the floor of the workplace restroom.

After completing the repair work, KEPCO requested a reduction from the waterworks office, and the waterworks office reflected this by applying an exemption of the sewerage charges and other measures, ultimately imposing a final amount of 14.8 million won.

KEPCO, however, filed the administrative litigation seeking full revocation of the disposition imposing the water charges.

The administrative court that heard the administrative litigation ruled in favor of the waterworks office.

This was because, under the water supply ordinance, a water user has a duty to maintain the piping equipment within its workplace, and the user is responsible for any loss arising from a failure to maintain it.

The court determined that "the responsibility for managing the unstaffed workplace lies with KEPCO, and KEPCO must also bear the water-pipe leak and the resulting loss."

The court also held that "the fact that the waterworks office did not conduct on-site meter readings for fourteen months and therefore failed to detect the leak early was due to KEPCO's poor management, and a request for an additional reduction is unwarranted given that the water charges have already been reduced."

In connection with the administrative litigation, we analyzed the administrative court's judgment, which found that the large water bill imposed for a leak at an unstaffed workplace was a lawful imposition attributable to the failure to maintain the facilities.

As unstaffed workplaces have been increasing in recent years, business operators should detect problems such as water-pipe leaks early through regular meter readings and fulfill their maintenance duties.

If a tax has been imposed unfairly, relief may be obtained through administrative litigation. That said, because administrative litigation is brought against the State, a local government, or a public institution, it requires a deep understanding of administrative law, the Administrative Procedures Act, and the relevant regulations and precedents, unlike ordinary civil or criminal litigation.

The Daeryun Law Firm LLP 🔗administrative litigation attorneys draw on extensive administrative litigation experience to provide legal assistance and work to protect their clients' rights and interests, so if you need help, you are welcome to request a legal consultation with Daeryun.