logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.04.13 2017누30896
전담여행사 지정취소처분 취소청구의 소
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

The reasoning for the court's explanation of this case is as follows: (a) No. 15 of the judgment of the court of first instance is deemed to have been difficult; (b) the notice of the disposition of this case contains "1." (the relevant provision in the notice of this case as of March 4, 2016) "Article 3-2 of the Guidelines", which is a provision on the renewal of exclusive travel agents, which is the grounds for the disposition of this case. However, more specifically, "non-submission of tax invoice for 14,15" among the matters stated in "fact that constitutes the grounds for disposition" is difficult to be deemed to be a ground for "less the standard points for renewal" which is the grounds for disposition of this case, and "low-scale of foreign currency income for 15 years" and "low-scale of foreign currency income" are only part of the grounds for renewal, which are the grounds for disposition of this case, and it is difficult to see that the plaintiff did not transmit the additional evaluation guidelines of 2016 (2) prior to the filing of the lawsuit of this case."

(1) The grounds for appeal by the defendant are not significantly different from the allegations in the first instance court, and even if all evidence submitted in the first instance court are examined, the above argument by the defendant is rejected, and the judgment of the first instance court that accepted the plaintiff's argument is justified). Accordingly, the plaintiff's claim is justified. Accordingly, the judgment of the first instance court is justified and it is dismissed as the defendant's appeal is without merit.

arrow