The judgment of the first instance court, including the selective claims added by this Court, shall be modified as follows:

The defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. 1) B is a trucking transport business entity stipulated under the Trucking Transport Business Act, and is a person who actually manages an entrusted truck under his/her name by exercising the right to operate and manage the trucking transport business directly or by entrusting it to a designated owner entity, by concluding an entrustment contract with the former owner entity to entrust the operation and management right of the trucking transport business to the latter owner entity. 2) C is a person who actually operates a truck with a limited liability company D, E, a limited liability company, a limited liability company, a limited liability company, B, and any other subsidiary entity, including a limited liability company, E, a limited liability company, and a limited liability company.

The defendant is a person registered as a representative director B from July 30, 2007 to December 8, 2015.

3) From April 9, 2013 to December 8, 2015, the Plaintiff is a local government that granted fuel subsidies under Article 43(2) of the Trucking Transport Business Act and Article 9-14 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act to a truck owned by B. (b) Article 3(5)1 of the former Trucking Transport Business Act (amended by Act No. 7100, Jan. 20, 2004) (amended by Act No. 7711, Dec. 7, 2005) converted the freight trucking services operated as a previous registered system into a licensed trucking service, and added the requirements that “the Minister of Construction and Transportation shall meet the supply standards publicly notified by the Minister for each type of business in consideration of freight transport demand” as one of the criteria for permission for trucking transport services, which was enacted and publicly notified under the foregoing provision, and thus, does not pose a risk of excessive usage (in principle).