2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The plaintiff is a trucking transport business operator who is engaged in ordinary trucking transport business with general cargo transport business as a company established for the purpose of business.

On March 16, 2011, the Plaintiff: (a) forged the entry of the column in the notice of permission for trucking freight trucking services issued by the Defendant for salvage type special vehicles by arbitrarily changing the entry of the vehicle from the special vehicle for salvage to the towing type special vehicle; and (b) scrapped the A salvage type special vehicle owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant vehicle”) and completed the registration of borrowing and lending the vehicle as the limited towing type special vehicle with a new supply.

(2) On August 28, 2014, the head of the Gun issued a disposition to the Plaintiff on August 28, 2014, under Article 19(1)2 of the Trucking Transport Business Act (hereinafter referred to as the “ Trucking Transport Business Act”), on the ground that “the Plaintiff changed the type of a towing vehicle into a towing vehicle, which is a vehicle subject to restriction on the supply of rescue-type vehicles, by using a written notification on the alteration of the permitted matters of the trucking transport business (vehicle scrapping) for the Plaintiff, the head of the Gun issued a disposition to the Plaintiff on the five truck vehicles (including the instant vehicle) operated by the Plaintiff, 60 days (from September 16, 2014 to November 14, 2014) of the total business suspension.

On September 19, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the head of Boan-gun seeking revocation of the suspension of the entire operation (Seoul District Court 2014Guhap1512), but was sentenced to dismissal on June 11, 2015, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on June 27, 2015.

After July 2, 2015, the Maan-gun notified the Defendant that the instant vehicle can be restored to its original permitted type only because it is illegal for the Defendant to remove the instant vehicle from the original permitted type.

On September 2015, the Plaintiff reported the scrapping of the instant vehicle to the Defendant on behalf of the truck, the supply of which is restricted, but the Defendant on September 2015.