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.

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff reported to the company operating trucking transport business, (attached Form 1), the vehicle increased for the special purpose freight lane that is permitted to be supplied, such as the description of "the details of the car scrapping" in the above list, and reported the car scrapping for the cargo lane, such as the general type of the vehicle, the supply of which is restricted, and registered the car scrapping in accordance with the receipt of the report, or acquired the vehicle registered for the car scrapping by such method.

On October 22, 2014, the head of each Si/Gun/Gu of Gwangju Metropolitan City changed and registered each of the vehicles listed in the list of the special-purpose trucks (attached Form 1) to a truck with limited supply. This is not subject to reporting but subject to permission for change, and it changed or acquired such vehicle without obtaining permission for change. Article 19(1)2 of the Trucking Transport Business Act and Article 5(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Trucking Transport Business Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26251, May 26, 2015) on the whole truck owned by the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 19(1)2 of the Trucking Transport Business Act and Article 5(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Trucking Transport Business Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26251, Oct. 22, 2014).

Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the disposition taken on October 22, 2014, and as a result, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit was based on the following: (a) vehicles listed in the list of “Attachment 1” in the Gwangju District Court on October 29, 2015, for which the grounds for disposal are not recognized, are limited to one (25) vehicle; (b) but (c) a disposition for the suspension of the entire business was excessively excessive and abused discretion.

“For reasons, the judgment in favor of the Plaintiff was rendered (Seoul District Court Decision 2015Guhap1646).

Accordingly, while the head of Gwangju Metropolitan City filed an appeal, the Plaintiff voluntarily withdrawn the lawsuit on August 29, 2016, and the head of Gwangju Metropolitan City Mining Office consented to the withdrawal of the lawsuit on September 7, 2016, the lawsuit was concluded.

The defendant.