과징금부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is a petroleum retailer operating a gas station with the trade name “C gas station” in Ulsan-gun B.
The Plaintiff has a mobile-sale vehicle (vehicle number: D; hereinafter “instant mobile-sale vehicle”) capable of transporting oil 1,50 liters.
The mobile seller of this case may load two kinds of oil, and the external abandonment is one.
Therefore, the driver's choice of the kind of oil installed outside the vehicle operates, selects the kind of oil, and then uses the same external abandonment.
B. On September 28, 2017, the Plaintiff received a request from Ulsan-gun EF located in Ulsan-gun for an automobile transit from the owner of the vehicle, and around 14:10 on the same day, the Plaintiff used the instant mobile-sale vehicle to Gkin in F (hereinafter “the instant forkin”) in the instant mobile-sale vehicle, thereby paying the light oil of 55 liters.
C. The Plaintiff, as seen above, operated a gas server and oiled in the process of making the gas station, and among which, among which, the Plaintiff was exposed to employees of the Yong-Nam headquarters, the Institute was exposed to employees belonging to the Yong-Nam headquarters.
On December 4, 2017, the Defendant filed a complaint with the competent police station against the Plaintiff, based on Articles 13(4)8, 14(1)3, 39-2, and 46 of the Petroleum Business Act, on the ground that the Plaintiff committed an act prohibited under Article 39(1)8 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (hereinafter “petroleum Business Act”) to sell “as the fuel for a motor vehicle,” the Defendant imposed a penalty surcharge of KRW 100,00,000, and a fine of KRW 6 months for publication (hereinafter “instant disposition”), and the Plaintiff filed a complaint with the competent police station.
E. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the Ulsan Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission, but the Ulsan Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on February 28, 2018.
F. On March 5, 2018, the Plaintiff was Ulsan District Court No. 2018 High Court Decision 2018 High Court Decision 201Da1882, and “Plaintiff” around September 14, 2017.