logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2017. 12. 07. 선고 2017누12948 판결
주류출고 감랑처분 취소[국승]
Title

Revocation of a disposition of reduction in alcoholic beverages delivery;

Summary

As the Plaintiff was subjected to a disposition of revocation of license by selling alcoholic beverages during the period of business suspension, the disposition of this case rendered by the Plaintiff following the lawsuit disputing the above disposition of revocation of license is legitimate.

Related statutes

Article 9 of the Liquor Tax Act

Cases

Daejeon High Court 2017-Nu-12948 ( December 7, 2017), Daejeon High Court

Plaintiff

QQQ

Defendant

a) the Director of the Tax Office

Conclusion of Pleadings

November 2, 2017

Imposition of Judgment

December 7, 2017

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons why the court's explanation on this case was "the fifth third-party ruling of the court of first instance".

The plaintiff shall inform the manufacturer or importer of the notice of the reduction of alcoholic beverage of this case.

On the ground and the above companies are likely to make it difficult or impossible to recover the price from the plaintiff.

the supply of the product, and even if the supply of a part of the product continues, the attempted payment obligation

Inasmuch as advance payment, settlement of cash, etc. is required, the rights and obligations of the plaintiff are directly required.

It is alleged to the effect that the Plaintiff has a relationship." However, the situation alleged by the Plaintiff is the situation.

of this case, the number of brewing alcoholic beverages of this case, which became aware of the fact of the reduction notice.

One of the several countermeasures that can be taken by a participant can be seen as a result of de facto anti-social action.

The notification itself does not directly affect the Plaintiff’s rights and obligations.

It is difficult to add "in addition" as well as the entry of the reasons for the decision of the first instance, so the Administrative Litigation Act No. 8

Article 42 (2) of the Civil Procedure Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be cited as it is.

2. Conclusion

Thus, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and thus it shall be dismissed, and the judgment of the court of first instance shall be dismissed.

As above, the plaintiff's appeal is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

arrow