logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.04.04 2016누76581
액화석유가스충전사업허가취소처분 취소청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for dismissal or addition of the judgment of the first instance as follows. Thus, this is accepted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

According to the third judgment of the court of first instance, the following is added to the following: (i) the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs’s 2nd sentence as “the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs”; (ii) the 5th 12nd sentence as “gambing”; and (iii) the 8th 1st sentence as “the fact that there is no risk of safety accidents”; and (iv) the 6th 2nd sentence of the court of first instance as “it is difficult to correct the said fact”; (iv) the 6th 9th sentence of the court of first instance stating that “it only speaks that the Plaintiff may file an application for transfer if it is possible to transfer and make a public announcement of placement in law,” and (v) the Plaintiff’s request for installation and public announcement of the 20th 5th sentence as to the cancellation of the permission from Kimpo-si’s economic promotion to H on April 24, 2015.” (v) The Plaintiff’s request for installation and public announcement of the 20th 30th of the Plaintiff’s 20.

The phrase asserts that the opinion was presented.

However, I responded to the opinion about the cancellation of the permission in this case with the Kimpo-si Economic Promotion Department.

arrow