1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Details of the disposition

The plaintiffs are companies running automobile rental business.

On July 19, 2019, the Defendant revoked the registration of each car rental business on the ground that “the Plaintiff had a person who is not a car rental business entity use part of the Plaintiffs’ commercial automobiles, thereby having the automobile rental business entity run the automobile rental business, thereby violating Article 12(1) of the Passenger Transport Service Act (hereinafter “passenger Transport Service Act”).”

(이하 원고들에 대한 처분 모두를 합하여 ‘이 사건 처분’이라 한다). [인정근거] 다툼 없는 사실, 갑 제1, 2, 5, 6호증, 을 제1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7호증(가지번호 있는 것은 가지번호 포함)의 각 기재, 변론 전체의 취지 근거 및 관계 법령▣ 여객자동차법 제2조(정의) 이 법에서 사용하는 용어의 뜻은 다음과 같다.

2. The term "passenger transport service" means passenger transport business, rent-a-car business, bus terminal business, passenger transport franchise business;

Article 12 (Prohibition against Use of Name, etc.) (1) No transport business operator may allow any other transport business operator or any person who is not a transport business operator to operate passenger transport business with or without compensation by using any or all of his/her commercial automobiles.

In such cases, the same shall apply where a transport business entity gives instructions related to the business to another transport business entity or a person who is not a transport business entity.

Article 35 (Provisions Applicable Mutatis Mutandis) With respect to the prohibition, etc. of the use of the name of a rent-a-car business (for the purpose of mid-and-mid-mid-the-counter), Article 12 (Limity)

Article 85 (Cancellation, etc. of Licenses) (1) The Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport or a Mayor/Do Governor (limited to cases where a passenger transport service provider is a rent-a-car business) may order the revocation of registration of a passenger transport service provider if the passenger transport service provider falls

13. Where he/she has violated the prohibition against use of name under Article 12 (including cases where it is applicable mutatis mutandis under Article 35);