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

A. On February 21, 2007, the representative director A of the company A, a limited liability company for the illegal registration of the change of the present vehicle, stored the notification of the repair of the vehicle for salvage type special vehicle type C, which was issued through a normal procedure in advance, in the computer, and thereafter, the type of the scrapping column of the above repair notification was “salving type” from “salv type” to “salv type”, and the detailed type was forged by submitting the notification of the repair of the vehicle under the name of the president of the Association of the Association of the South-Nam trucking Transport Services, which was forged by entering the specific type in “scalk” to “ck” to the public official in charge of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the Yong-gun, thereby illegally registering the above C to a towing special vehicle (c) the supply of which is restricted by illegal means, without permission for de facto change.

B. After the Plaintiff’s acquisition, the instant vehicle was transferred to the video camera on July 19, 2007, to the limited company, to the Geumam Logistics Co., Ltd. on July 23, 2007, and to the Plaintiff, a corporation operating freight trucking services on July 31, 2007, respectively.

(Plaintiff transferred the instant vehicle to Korea-Japan Logistics Co., Ltd. on March 23, 2010, but immediately re-transfered on March 29, 2010.

The instant disposition was notified by the head of Yongamamamamamamamamamamamamb of the fact that the instant vehicle was unlawfully modified on November 20, 2015, and on December 21, 2015, on the ground that the Plaintiff was the final transferee of the instant vehicle that was unlawfully modified on December 21, 2015, based on Articles 3(3) and (5)1, 16(4), and 19(1)2 of the Trucking Transport Business Act, and Article 5(1) [Attachment Table 1] of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of an administrative disposition to the effect that he would dispose of the instant vehicle for 60 days during the suspension of operation, but did not directly change the illegal registration of the instant vehicle.