logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2018.11.22 2018구합5219
과징금 및 공표 부과처분 취소 청구의 소
Text

1. The Defendant’s disposition imposing a penalty surcharge of KRW 50,000,000 on the Plaintiff on November 3, 2017 and the disposition imposing a penalty surcharge of KRW 3 months for publication shall be revoked.

2...

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that runs the petroleum sales business, etc. with its head office in 377 head office in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun.

B. The Plaintiff supplied petroleum to A and B. However, on May 19, 2017, the Plaintiff’s petroleum samples collected by the Institute at the Plaintiff’s petroleum supply site, which contained a mixture of other petroleum products, such as car light oil, etc. (hereinafter “instant fake petroleum products”).

C. Based on the results of the above inspection, the Defendant violated Article 29(1)1 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (hereinafter “petroleum Business Act”), including the manufacture and sale of fake petroleum products in this case, and on November 3, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition of imposition of a penalty surcharge of KRW 50 million in lieu of suspension of business for three months pursuant to Articles 14(1)3 and 39-2, and a disposition of imposition of a fine of KRW 3 months in lieu of suspension of business pursuant to Article 13(4)8 of the Petroleum Business Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

In response to the instant disposition, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Ulsan Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission, but the said commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on December 22, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 6, 7, 10 through 12, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion did not constitute a violation of Article 29(1)1 of the Petroleum Business Act by manufacturing and selling fake petroleum products of this case.

Therefore, the instant disposition should be revoked as it is unlawful.

3. Determination on the lawfulness of the instant disposition

(a) Entry in the attached Form of relevant statutes;

B. The Institute and the police in charge of recognition 1 on May 19, 2017.

arrow