beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Although the grounds alleged by the Plaintiff in the trial of the first instance while filing an appeal are not significantly different from the details alleged by the Plaintiff in the first instance trial, even if all of the relevant decisions (Seoul High Court Decisions 2014Nu4239, Jan. 23, 2015; 2015Du38535, Jun. 11, 2015) concerning the same issue are examined as the evidence submitted in the first instance and the first instance trial, the first instance judgment rejecting the Plaintiff’s claim for the revocation of the return of fuel subsidies is justifiable.
Therefore, the court's explanation on the instant case is based on Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the corresponding part, except for dismissal or addition or deletion of some contents as follows.
Under the fourth sentence of the judgment of the first instance court, the " Trucking Transport Business Act (hereinafter referred to as the " Trucking Transport Business Act")" in the fourth and fourth sentence shall be read as the " Trucking Transport Business Act (amended by Act No. 12475, Mar. 18, 2014; hereinafter referred to as the " Truck Act")."
Article 3 subparag. 1 of the former Regulations on the Management of Scrapping and Scrapping of Trucks (in particular, enacted by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs No. 2009-118, Nov. 18, 2009; hereinafter the same shall apply) is merely an administrative rule enacted without statutory delegation, and since illegal methods such as fabrication of documents or offering of bribe have not been used in the process of the scrapping of the instant car, and it was lent as a general truck due to a public’s mistake, the instant scrapping is legally made.”
In the end of the 10hhhhhhh of the first instance court ruling, the phrase "Isn't have been prosecuted for the forgery, alteration, or offering of bribe in the process of the scrapping of the instant vehicle, but only several representative special truck including each of the instant vehicles due to the mistake of a public official.