beta
(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.04.13 2016구합57656

과징금부과처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

The details and details of the disposition are those who run private taxi transportation business.

On July 24, 2014, the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City publicly announced the improvement order and matters to be observed of passenger transport business as follows pursuant to Article 23(1) of the Passenger Transport Service Act (hereinafter “passenger Transport Service Act”) pursuant to Article 23(1) of the Passenger Transport Service Act, in order to promote the use of taxi and provide convenience for taxi passengers to easily settle, and prevent transport employees from requesting cash settlement to passengers.

(B) The following parts relating to the installation of the card settlement machine shall be referred to as the "order for the improvement of the business of this case". When violating the former provisions of the Act, the subject of the disposition and the detailed taxi card settlement machine and the subject of the location setting: A taxi transport business entity shall install a card settlement terminal for the payment of taxi charges.

The location of card terminals shall be installed as follows for the convenience of taxi passengers:

-The equipment main body capable of recognizing the Magic card shall be between the left side of the Magic card and the steering seat): Provided, That in the event that the Magic card has been installed on the Magic card, the equipment main body shall be installed within the Center Pesta, - The card terminal installed on the IC card recognition Magic card type card type card type (fic card type card type) shall be able to use the pre-payment and the post-payment card between the driver and the Magic chief and, if not, shall be suspended from operation and shall commence operation after immediate maintenance.

Article 23 of the Enforcement Decree of the Passenger Transport Service Act [Attachment 3] of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Suspension of Part of Business under subparagraph 54 of the violation, or the penalty surcharge under subparagraph 40 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Article [Attachment 5] of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Suspension of Part of Business under subparagraph 54 of the violation : 1.2 million won or - 200 thousand won for the suspension of part of business: 40 days: 60 days when the plaintiff replaces the existing separate card terminal with a single card terminal around early 2015.