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.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. Trucks listed in the [Attachment 1] list (hereinafter “each of the instant trucks” and, individually, specified the number of trucks in the table below) were modified and registered without permission for change as indicated below.

Attached Form

1 wing-type vehicles (wing-type vehicles) wing-type vehicles (wing-type vehicles) 2 wing-type vehicles (wing-type vehicles) of the first type registered to change the type of permission, 3 wing-type vehicles (wing-type vehicles) and 4 wing-type general transport vehicles (AL-type vehicles)

B. The Plaintiff is a corporation established for the purpose of trucking transportation business.

On July 2015, the Plaintiff acquired freight trucking services using Nos. 1 and 2 trucks from a limited liability company B, and around April 2016, the Plaintiff acquired freight trucking services using Nos. 3 and 4 trucks from a limited liability company C.

C. The Defendant issued a disposition of suspending the operation of 60 days on February 1, 2016, after prior notice of the administrative disposition on February 1, 2016, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s registration of illegally changing the permissible truck to a truck with a limited truck to supply by illegal means, and then the Defendant subsequently acquired the freight trucking services of each of the instant truck in violation of Article 3(3) of the former Trucking Transport Business Act (amended by Act No. 14725, Mar. 21, 2017; hereinafter “ Trucking Transport Business Act”), on the grounds that “the instant trucking trucking transport business was finally taken over by the final transferee of the trucking transport business of the instant case,” and issued a disposition of suspending the operation of 3 and 4 trucks on April 25, 2016 after prior notice of the administrative disposition on February 1, 2016.

(hereinafter referred to as the “first disposition”) to suspend the operation of each of the instant trucks.

In the process of the comprehensive audit of Sis/Guns, etc. around February 2017, Jeonnam-do, confirmed the fact that each of the instant trucks still is being operated in a state of illegal change through the Motor Vehicle Management Information System, and requested the defendant to correct the administrative disposition, such as reducing the number of trucks, in accordance with the Trucking Law.