Whether the period of office which is not engaged in driving practice and is held by the president of a trade union is included in driving experience under Article 15 (1) 1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Automobile Transport Business Act (negative)

The special provisions on the license of automobile transport business under Article 15 (1) 1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Automobile Transport Business Act are preferential measures for those who have a certain accidentless driving experience, so the period of time when they are not engaged in driving practice and hold office as the head of a trade union shall be excluded from the above driving experience.

Articles 4 and 6 of the Automobile Transport Business Act, Article 15 (1) 1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Automobile Transport Business Act

Plaintiff

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 3 others

Daegu High Court Decision 83Gu110 delivered on December 29, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to Article 15 (1) 1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Automobile Transport Business Act, with respect to a person who has been engaged in a business for at least three years from the date of application for a license and has been engaged in a business for at least the past three years from the date of the last driving, a license for a taxi transport business or a general area freight transport business may be granted under the condition that one motor vehicle is directly driving for the last three years from the date of the last driving. This is a preferential measure for a person who has been engaged in a business without a certain period of time. Thus, as determined by the court below, the period for which the plaintiff is not engaged in driving and is in office as the head of a trade union shall be excluded from the above driving experience, and Article 15 (1) 1 of the Enforcement Rule of the said Act requires a person who has been engaged in a business for at least three years from the date of the last driving without a license and has been engaged in a business for at least the past three years from the date of the last driving without a license. As seen above, the court below's decision to this purport is justified and acceptable.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)