logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2017.07.13 2017누10904
우수제품 지정기간 연장신청 거부 처분 취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where part of the judgment of the court of first instance is written as follows. Thus, this is accepted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Part 2, "The designation period of excellent products of this case is extended until March 13, 2017," under Section 11-12, "the designation period of excellent products of this case is extended, and accordingly, the expiration date of the designation period of excellent products of this case was until March 13, 2017." Section 8 of Section 1, "I am the head office, but the head office," and thereafter, "I am different opinions with the head office about whether they constitute direct production" as stated in "the response related to the measure of emergency suspension after the suspension of transactions in the Lazine General shopping mall" dated June 10, 2016. The purport of "I am the defendant's assertion that the plaintiff still has been directly produced the product of this case, while the defendant did not recognize it and added "the plaintiff's decision is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit."

arrow