logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2018.04.05 2017누13873
과징금부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning the instant case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition or dismissal of the following part as set forth in paragraph (2). Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(The grounds alleged by the plaintiff in this Court while filing an appeal are not significantly different from the contents alleged by the plaintiff in the first instance court, and even if all the evidence submitted to the first instance court and this court are examined, the fact-finding and the judgment of the first instance court are justified). 2. The addition or dismissal is justified.

A. Following the fourth page 18 of the first instance judgment of the part added, “I am,” “I am, as the Plaintiff asserts, find out the phenomenon in which the Plaintiff’s record of the amount of the alcoholic beverage of this case was deleted on August 10, 2016, the Plaintiff added “I am, as alleged, with the repair company and the Korea Institute for Mechanical and Electric Testing and Testing of Machinery, on August 31, 2016, notified of the result of inspection of the instant sales vehicle of the result of the inspection by the Institute, the Plaintiff was running the inspection and repair of the alcoholic vehicle of this case on August 31, 2016.” In addition, the first instance judgment of the first instance judgment, “I am, considering the fact that the Plaintiff gains less than the fixed amount than the Plaintiff’s assertion,” the Plaintiff added “I am,” at the fourth page 20 of the first instance judgment of the first instance judgment, I am to determine the amount of penalty surcharge of KRW 100 (200) and 100 (200) of the Enforcement Rule of the Petroleum Business Act.

The judgment of "A." in Section 2 of Section 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance on the part of the judgment of the court of first instance is as shown in Section 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance on the part of the judgment of the court of first instance as stated in Section 2 of "B."

arrow