영업허가취소처분취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. As to the instant case cited in the judgment of the court of first instance, the reasoning of this court is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for partial revision as follows. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
In Part 6 of the 6th judgment of the first instance court, "this Court" shall be regarded as "Council District Court".
In the sixth part of the judgment of the court of first instance, "this Court" shall be deemed to be "the above court", and in the eighth part, "this Court" shall be deemed to be "the above court".
The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, such as Gap evidence No. 14-1 to No. 4, concerning the fact that the plaintiff had gone through the 7th judgment of the court of first instance, is insufficient to recognize it, and it is possible to recognize it differently.
In Part 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance, “Non-existent” is added to “The volume of construction waste 260,749 tons is calculated by multiplying the volume of each waste type measured by the volume of waste as shown in Table 1 (No. 5) of the Guidelines on the Performance Guarantee of Disposal of A Wastes (Rules of the Ministry of Environment) by the proportion of each waste type as shown in the attached Table 1 (No. 5) of the Guidelines for the Performance Guarantee of Disposal of A Wastes by the type of waste surveyed by B. Thus, there is no apparent evidence to deem that there is an error in the results of the survey conducted by B in the process of calculating the volume, or in the classification of waste or the application of unit weight made by the Defendant ( even if there is some error in the application of unit weight, it is clear that the quantity calculated by applying the unit weight claimed by the Plaintiff exceeds 20,000 tons much)”
After the judgment of the court of first instance in the 10th 17th 18th 10th 17 and the 18th 18th 18th "the plaintiff's 's 's 's 's 's 's own land loaned to the plaintiff as a site to the plaintiff's 's place of business', the plaintiff's 's 's 's 's own project is