beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On March 6, 2009, Daedo ELS Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Largedo ELS”) prepared a false sales contract with respect to two large-scale tank-type trucking tanks, and obtained a total of 176 special-use trucking trucks permit by using the false sales contract, and registered the loan of 176 general-use truck number plates to 176 general-use truck number plates without obtaining permission for change.
B. On May 26, 2009, on October 14, 2009, and June 1, 2012, the Plaintiff acquired three (A, B, and C) out of the number plates of general trucking businesses, which were unlawfully generated by Taedodo LSS, respectively, and changed the vehicle number to D, E, and F (each of the instant trucks) and reported the transfer or acquisition of freight trucking services to the Defendant. Each of the above reports was accepted.
C. On July 13, 2015 and July 28, 2015, the Defendant issued a 30-day disposition of suspending the operation (hereinafter “instant disposition of suspending the operation”) pursuant to Article 19(1)2 of the Trucking Transport Business Act on the ground that the instant truck violated Article 3(3) of the Trucking Transport Business Act (hereinafter “ Trucking Transport Business Act”) by making an illegal increase in the number of trucks as seen above, and that the Plaintiff succeeds to an administrative disposition against the illegal act of Taedok LS.
On November 4, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition to refuse and recover fuel subsidies (hereinafter “instant disposition”) with respect to each of the instant trucks in accordance with Article 44 and (3) of the Trucks Act, Article 6 Subparag. 1, and Article 26 Subparag. 18 of the Regulations on the Management of Fuel Subsidies (hereinafter “Rules on the Management of Fuel Subsidies”) on the same ground as the instant disposition of suspension of operation.
【Ground of recognition” includes the fact that there is no dispute, and there are evidence Nos. 1 through 3.