beta
Text
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.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited this case, is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following, thereby citing this case as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article
[Supplementary judgment] The plaintiff asserts that "the plaintiff did not sell the oil directly to E as fuel for a vehicle," and that the plaintiff had a justifiable reason for violating such obligation even if he had sold the oil directly to E as fuel for a vehicle.
The following circumstances cited by the first instance court as seen earlier are added to the various circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted by the first instance court:
E was exposed to the Defendant’s employees, who had been informed in advance of the fact that he was 70 liters of the instant dump truck under the influence of the method of the use of the instant dump truck in the instant gas station, rather than the accelerator gas station.
The gas station of this case started business before E begins with its dump trucks, and did not stop the above E acts despite the fact that E was preparing for business by one of the staff members of the gas station.
The plaintiff is the day before sunrise and the employee of the gas station did not recognize E's main liability for dump trucks in the office. However, the employee of the gas station is bound to be sensitive to the vehicle moving within the gas station due to the nature of the business, and it is not consistent with the empirical rule that he was aware of the movement of the dump trucks in light of the vehicle size and noise of dump trucks, etc. of this case. It seems that the employee of the gas station was in close vicinity to the location of the gas station, and that the dump trucks of this case were in close vicinity to the location of the gas station in the office to which he had access, etc.