Jindo-gun, Gasa-do Island Residents Face Crisis Over 'Ferry Operation' Suspension

Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport Pushes for Project Fund Return Citing Procedural Misunderstanding

Incorrect Legal Interpretation, Serious Factual Misunderstanding, Only Innocent Residents Suffer

Residents of Gasa are strongly urging the cancellation of the partial revocation notice regarding the decision to grant the Dosun national treasury subsidy on the morning of the 10th at 10 a.m., and are demanding the suspension of subsidy recovery. (Photo by Jindo-gun)

[Asia Economy Honam Reporting Headquarters Reporter Kim Hyun] Jindo County is facing a crisis where the ferry operation must be suspended due to a serious factual misunderstanding by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport regarding the project funds used for the construction of a ferry aimed at resolving the disruption of the daily living area of island residents and the suspension of agricultural and fishery product shipments, which threaten their livelihoods.

According to Jindo County on the 10th, in March 2015, a private passenger ferry company operating the Gahak Port↔Gasado route suddenly stopped operations, citing collective complaints from fishermen around the Gasado route (Jindo Express Shipping) and deteriorating profitability (Seojindo Nonghyup).

Afterward, for more than three years until the Gasado ferry was constructed, Gasado residents relied on irregularly operating cargo ships to travel to the mainland for work or took fishing boats for about an hour to commute to the mainland.

As a result, a maritime accident occurred in 2016, threatening the lives of residents, and the sales channels for agricultural and fishery products such as seaweed produced in Gasado were blocked, causing economic difficulties.

Jindo County applied for a change in the comprehensive island development plan (construction of the Gasado ferry) to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport in 2016 to resolve transportation inconveniences for island residents and secure the budget for ferry construction.

The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport issued a disapproval, stating that “constructing a new passenger ferry on a nationally subsidized route where passenger ferries are operated with national funds is not allowed because it overlaps with existing routes,” based on the consultation opinion from the Ministry of the Interior and Safety.

Jindo County, to guarantee the movement rights, survival rights, and life rights of island residents whose ferry service was cut off, invested 2.7 billion KRW and constructed the ferry in 2018 due to unavoidable urgency.

The Board of Audit and Inspection notified the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport through an audit on the ‘Improper Promotion of Multipurpose Vessel Construction Project’ to consider measures such as recovering subsidies improperly used without approval of the change in the comprehensive island development plan, in accordance with the Subsidy Management Act.

The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport pointed out that constructing the ferry with the budget intended for a water supply vessel was an ‘illegal change of use’ and notified Jindo County of the partial cancellation of the 2.7 billion KRW national subsidy grant decision.

Subsequently, after 140 Gasado island residents filed complaints, the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission visited Gasado at the end of last year, conducted an investigation, and notified that the Ministry of the Interior and Safety’s lack of prior consultation with the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries regarding ▲definition of the route ▲cases of overlapping and intersecting port calls in 2016 was a serious procedural defect.

In other words, while the Mokpo↔Seogeochado route is a nationally subsidized route, the newly constructed Gasado↔Swimi route operated by Jindo County’s ferry is a general route and not considered overlapping support.

The Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission stated in the resolution notified to Jindo County and others, “The Gasado ferry construction project appears to have used the development plan sequence change to prioritize usage to resolve the difficult livelihood crisis of Gasado residents, and it is difficult to view the subsidy as being used for a completely different purpose.”

Furthermore, the Commission pointed out, “If the Minister of the Interior and Safety had processed the change application for the comprehensive island development project plan after consulting with the Minister of Oceans and Fisheries, who operates and manages maritime laws, and the Mokpo Regional Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Office Chief, responsible for licensing maritime passenger transport businesses and route announcements, approval of the change in the comprehensive island development project plan would have been sufficiently possible.”

However, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport maintains a principled stance that constructing the ferry with the comprehensive island development project budget intended for a water supply vessel is unauthorized budget use and plans to recover the entire cost used for ferry construction.

Gasado residents argue, “Although we applied for a project fund change in an urgent situation threatening our survival rights, the central government misjudged the facts and disapproved it. According to Article 6, Paragraph 3, Item 3 of the Island Development Promotion Act, the budget used to alleviate transportation inconveniences for island residents is lawful use, not misuse.”

Residents added, “We strongly urge the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport and the Iksan Regional Land Management Office Chief to deeply consider these circumstances and respect the opinion of the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission by canceling the partial cancellation notice of the national subsidy grant for the Gasado ferry and stopping the subsidy recovery.”

Residents emphasized, “Due to the initially incorrect legal interpretation, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport disapproved the project plan approval, and based on this, the Board of Audit and Inspection conducted a flawed audit, demanding the return of project funds. We will explore all measures including administrative appeals, administrative litigation, and legal actions against related parties.”

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.