logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2016.01.14 2015구합11597
과징금부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff operates a gas station (hereinafter “instant gas station”) with the trade name “C gas station” in Chungcheong City B.

On May 25, 2015, for the quality inspection of petroleum products for the instant gas station, the former North Korea headquarters collected each quality inspection sample from two main-use establishments (number 14, 15) and mobile-sale vehicle D (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) within the instant gas station (number 16) and E (number 17).

On June 23, 2015, the president of the former North Korea Institute notified the Plaintiff of the result of the quality inspection of petroleum products with the content of fake petroleum products, as “the sample number Nos. 14, 15, and 17 among the sample sample and the sample number Nos. 16, are mixed with about 5% of other petroleum products (such as light oil, etc.) in the automobile transit, and constitutes fake petroleum products provided for in Article 2 subparag. 10 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (hereinafter “petroleum Business Act”).

On June 30, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the foregoing result, and notified the Plaintiff of the administrative disposition. On July 15, 2015, the Plaintiff requested the Institute to conduct re-inspection. On July 22, 2015, the former North Korean Institute notified the Plaintiff that “the result of the quality test of petroleum products is the same as the result of the quality test of petroleum products on June 23, 2015.”

Accordingly, on August 11, 2015, the Defendant imposed a penalty surcharge of KRW 50 million on the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff stored and sold fake petroleum products in violation of Article 29(1)1 of the Petroleum Business Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and the purport of the entire argument as to the lawfulness of the disposition of this case 1) The plaintiff's assertion as to whether the disposition of this case is legitimate

arrow