Whether it constitutes a serious traffic accident as stipulated in subparagraph 5 of Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act, which caused the collision of other vehicles being maintained on the motor vehicle on the motor vehicle on the motor vehicle along the motor vehicle on the motor vehicle along the motor vehicle along the motor vehicle on the motor vehicle along the motor vehicle along the motor vehicle on the motor vehicle along the motor vehicle along the motor

In full view of the negligence of the driver and the result of damage on the part of the driver, the accident caused by the driver's negligence on the part of the driver on the road in front of the driver on the road, and the accident caused the driver on the road in front of the driver on the road due to the breakdown, the accident caused the death of two others on the part of the driver on the road in front of the driver on the road.

Article 31 subparagraph 5 of the Automobile Transport Business Act

[Defendant-Appellant] Defendant 1 and 1 other (Attorney Lee Jin-jin et al.)

Governor of Jeollabuk-do

Gwangju High Court Decision 85Gu64 delivered on February 27, 1986

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal Nos. 1, 2, and 3 are also examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, on April 30, 1985, the non-party 1, a truck driver belonging to the plaintiff company, operated a truck from 06:40 on April 30, 1985 to 7:5:5103, which was operated by the plaintiff company, from the plaintiff company, to the plaintiff company, and it was far more than 19.76 kilometers at the time, and if the non-party 1 did not neglect his duty of care, he could cause damage to the left-hand side, but the non-party 7:7622, which was driven by the non-party 1, the non-party 7:40, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, a truck driver of the plaintiff company, operated the plaintiff company from the plaintiff company to the non-party 7:5103, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 2, and the non-party 3, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the accident.

In addition, even if the rules on the cancellation, etc. of the business license under Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act cited by the theory of the lawsuit stipulate the standards and punishment procedures for the cancellation, etc. of the license for the automobile transport business, the records show that the cancellation of the defendant's license of the vehicle involved in the accident of this case, i.e. the reduction of the number of vehicles, according to the above rules, was not recognized to have exceeded the discretion.

Therefore, all of the arguments are without merit, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)