logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.10.25 2017구단5131
영업정지처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 1, 2003, the Plaintiff is the business owner of a waste disposal company B, who obtained a comprehensive waste recycling permit from the Defendant for food wastes business (hereinafter “instant company”).

B. On February 7, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition of one month of business suspension on the ground that “the Plaintiff, while operating the instant company from January 2015 to May 2016, using food wastes collected by the Plaintiff, manufactured damp-style feed (which is directly used as feed or used as raw materials for mixed feed) that is “nick-style feed,” and which is “nick-style feed,” which is “nick-style feed,” and which is “nick-style feed,” which is “nick-style feed,” and which does not follow the feed process in accordance with the feed process under the Control of Livestock and Fish Feed Act, thereby modifying the permission for waste treatment business without permission (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In the event that the plaintiff's assertion that he/she is unable to conduct his/her business for a one-month period, the contract for food wastes of a large amount of 30 cases currently in progress will return to prisoners of war, and are liable to compensate for damages caused by breach of contract, and the livelihood of employees and their family members with up to eight persons are difficult, and malodor is likely to cause damage to neighboring residents due to leaving food waste in the place of business, but the disposition of this case that issued a disposition of suspension of business for one-month, which is not a penalty surcharge, even if considering the public interest for the defendant's realization, is in violation of the principle of excessive prohibition, and thus

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

C. Therefore, the generation of wastes is restricted to the maximum extent and wastes are eco-friendly.

arrow