The legal nature of the Rules (Ordinance No. 742 of the Ministry of Transport and Maritime Affairs No. 742 of July 31, 1982) concerning the disposition of cancellation, etc. of the business license under Article 31

Rules on the disposition of cancellation, etc. of business licenses under Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act (Ordinance No. 742 of the Ministry of Transport and Maritime Affairs No. 742 of July 31, 1982) are in the form of a Ordinance, but the nature and contents of the regulations are merely the fact that the administrative agency's business dealing rules such as the business dealing standards and disposition procedures

Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act

Supreme Court Decision 83Nu551 Delivered on February 28, 1984

[Judgment of the court below]

[Defendant-Appellee] Attorney Park Jong-young, Counsel for defendant-appellee

Seoul High Court Decision 83Gu210 delivered on November 17, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The Rules on the Disposition of Revocation, etc. of Automobile Transport Business License under Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act (Ordinance No. 742 of July 31, 1982) are in the form of Ordinances, but the nature and contents of the Rules are merely the fact that the regulations stipulate the business process rules in the administrative agency, such as the business process guidelines and disposition procedures concerning the disposition of cancellation, etc. of automobile transport business license (see Supreme Court Decision 83Nu551 delivered on February 28, 1984). Thus, the judgment below to the same purport is not justified and there is no argument to criticize the judgment of the court below on the basis of the opposing opinion, and the record reveals that the defendant's disposition of cancellation of the license of the automobile transport business in this case against the plaintiff was unlawful disposition beyond the discretionary power, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to abuse of discretionary power such as theory, and therefore, the discussion about this point cannot be

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 on the bench.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)