The legal nature of the rules concerning the disposition, such as the revocation, etc. of a business license under Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act.

The Rules on the Disposition of Revocation, etc. of Automobile Transport Business License under Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act (Ordinance of the Ministry of Transport and 1985, Mar. 11, 1985) is a form of Ordinance, but the nature and contents of the Rules are stipulated in the business process standards and the business process rules within the administrative agency such as disposition of cancellation, etc. of automobile transport business license. Since they have the nature of administrative orders within the administrative organization, it is merely binding upon the administrative agency or employees within the administrative organization, and it is not hard to externally arrest the people or the court, and therefore, the disposition of cancellation, etc. of automobile transport business license cannot be a legitimate disposition as a matter of course, and the legality of the disposition shall be determined according to the provisions of the Automobile Transport Business Act and the purport of the disposition.

Rules on Disposition of Cancellation, etc. of Business License (Ordinance of the Ministry of Transport No. 811 of March 11, 1985) under Articles 31 and 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act

Supreme Court Decision 83Nu551 Delivered on February 28, 1984

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 et al.

Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor

Seoul High Court Decision 87Gu1292 delivered on February 11, 1988

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The Rules on the Disposition of Cancellation, etc. of Automobile Transport Business License under Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Transport No. 811, Mar. 11, 1985) provides for administrative rules within administrative agencies such as business process standards and disposition procedures concerning cancellation, etc. of automobile transport business license, since the nature and contents of the regulations are merely a form of Ordinance, and therefore, they have the nature of administrative orders within the administrative agencies issued by the Minister of Construction and Transportation to establish guidelines for the exercise of authority and authority against the administrative agencies and employees, and therefore, the above rules are deemed to have the nature of administrative orders within the administrative agencies, which are issued by the Minister of Construction and Transportation for the purpose of setting the guidelines for the exercise of authority and authority of the administrative agencies and employees. Therefore, the above rules cannot be a legitimate disposition as a matter of course on the ground that the disposition such as cancellation, etc. of automobile transport business license is in accordance with the standards prescribed by the above rules, and whether the disposition is legitimate or not (see Supreme Court Decision 83Nu51, Feb. 28, 1987).

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the plaintiff as a business transferee of the private taxi transport business of this case succeeded to the suspension of operation due to the violation of the conditions of prohibition of vicarious driving on more than two occasions by the transferor before the transfer and takeover, and the plaintiff caused the cancellation of the license due to the violation of the conditions of prohibition of vicarious driving on more than two occasions under Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act and Article 3 (2) of the Regulation on Disposition of Revocation, etc. of the Transport Business License, the defendant should compare the cancellation of the business license with the public interest of the Automobile Transport Business Act, which is to be achieved by the cancellation of the license, and the disadvantage suffered by the other party due to the cancellation of the license, such as the fact-finding of the business, the contents of the violation of the conditions of the license, etc. The court below's decision that the plaintiff acquired the above taxi transport business of 21,000,000 won by transfer of the automobile transport business of 10,000,000 won, which is the only parent of the automobile transport business, and the plaintiff's.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice)