logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.01.16 2017구합23584
유가보조금환수처분취소
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. A’s illegal increase 1) A is a stock company B (hereinafter “B”).

On March 2009, while engaging in trucking transport business, around March 2009, in the case of permission for trucking transport business, there is no limit on the number of permissions. A prepared a false sales contract and applied for increase of the number of tanks, which are special-purpose trucking trucks, as if they were purchased due to business necessity. D, who is a public official in charge of truck registration of the Gu Office, obtained a permit for increase of the number without additional documents, and registered a 176 vehicle registration number in total, and then changed the number to a general truck with limited number of permissions under several laws, such as the creation of the 176 vehicle registration number and the alteration of the notification of large-scale repair, and then transferred the number of vehicles registration numbers, etc. connected to the above illegal permit for trucking transport business, and distributed them for consideration. A was found guilty on October 27, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as the above crime of violation of the Trucking Transport Business Act, and the judgment of the competent District Court became final and conclusive.

B. The Plaintiff’s acquisition of a vehicle, etc. 1) The Plaintiff is a company running a trucking transport business, etc., as shown in the separate sheet No. 1, and the F vehicle illegally increased by A as seen above (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).

(2) On December 13, 2016, G, upon the final receipt of the instant vehicle, filed a report on the transfer of freight trucking services with the Defendant on December 13, 2016. G, at that time, entered into an entrustment contract with the Plaintiff and entrusted the Plaintiff with the right to operate and manage the instant vehicle, and used the instant vehicle for oil supply with the oil purchase card issued in its name as the entrusted owner operator while operating the instant vehicle.

3 The defendant shall, at the request of G, conduct the same year from January 3, 2017.

3. The aggregate of KRW 1,851,409 up to 10.

arrow