logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.04.15 2014구합875
여객자동차운송사업계획변경 인가처분 취소소송
Text

1. As to the Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor on August 12, 2013, respectively.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 12, 1996, the Plaintiff is a passenger transport service provider who started the transportation of airport buses after obtaining a limited license for urban bus transport business from the Defendant on December 12, 1996, with respect to the service scope “the limitation of passengers (a contractor using an airport of an overseas travel enterprise)” and “the effective period from December 12, 1996 to December 11, 1999 (3 years). 2) The Plaintiff obtained from the Defendant on September 30, 1999 the expiration date of the limited license, “the limitation of passengers (a contractor using an overseas travel enterprise)”, “the limited license for urban bus transport business from December 12, 1999 to December 12, 199” (hereinafter “the limited license”). The Plaintiff obtained again the limited license for urban bus transport business from December 12, 199 to July 18, 200 to Incheon Airport from July 18, 200 to Incheon Airport.”

B. The Defendant’s instant disposition against the Intervenor as to the Intervenor is the Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor, who is a direct and extra-city bus transport business entity (hereinafter “ Intervenor”), subject to the Defendant’s application for approval on modification of the business plan of the Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s order, Northbuk-west, and the Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s order on August 12, 2013, with respect to the Intervenor, the number of flights on the existing route of “Silsan-Song-Song-Song-Song-Song-Song-Sacheon-Sacheon-Sacheon-Sacheon-Sacheon-Sacheon-Sacheon-Sacheon, the number of flights’s operation (hereinafter “first route”) reduced once a day in each of the Intervenor’s respective number, and excluded the remaining one day’s passage from the Intervenor’s order and the remaining three months following the extension.

arrow