beta
Text
1. On June 19, 2017, the Defendant’s application for a transportation business license for an entrusted truck that was filed against the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On November 1, 2003, the Plaintiff entered into a contract under which the Plaintiff will act on the title trust with the said company (attached Form 1) and entrust the transportation business using the instant truck (hereinafter “instant title trust and entrustment contract”) with the said company (hereinafter “instant truck”), and began the transportation business using the said truck around that time.
B. On August 23, 2010, the instant truck, which was operated by the Plaintiff under the name of EM, was registered for the transfer of the name (the change of the car number to B) to the Livestock Goods Distribution Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Housing Goods Distribution”), and was registered again on August 30, 2010, and thereafter on September 30, 201, the instant truck was changed from the Plaintiff to D (the Plaintiff’s spouse) on June 30, 2012.
C. On May 8, 2017, the Plaintiff terminated the instant title trust and the entrustment contract (hereinafter “instant termination”). Around that time, the Plaintiff applied for permission for trucking transport business using the instant truck, but the Defendant notified the Defendant of non-permission on the grounds of non-permission on June 19, 2017, as follows.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”. Around August 2010 and around September 2011, a trucking business operator is aware of the civil petitioner as a contracting party, if the recipient of fuel subsidies was changed to his/her spouse on June 2012, 2012, and becomes subject to special permission due to the continuity of an entrustment contract with the same vehicle after the termination of the said entrustment contract, which is not transferred or acquired by transfer, was entered into with the same vehicle. Therefore, the document must be confirmed as to whether the trucking business operator is aware of the civil petitioner as a contracting party.
(b) there is no dispute.