logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.06.25 2014구합12123
영업허가취소처분취소
Text

1. The Defendant’s disposition of suspension of the entire business of October 14, 2013 against the Plaintiff on the part of the Plaintiff and the truck of January 7, 2014.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff’s status is a trucking transport business entity, which is incorporated with the general cargo transport business as an objective business, and runs a general trucking transport business. On September 2, 2013, the Plaintiff changed the trade name from “stock company B” to “A”, which is the current trade name.

B. From April 5, 2013 to August 21, 2013, the Plaintiff reported the scrapping of a large-use truck to a general truck, the supply of which has been permitted over 22 occasions, as shown in the attached Table 1 (Attachment 1).

(hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant vehicles”, and the said report on the scrapping of the instant vehicles shall be referred to as “the scrapping of the instant vehicles”).

On October 14, 2013, the Defendant issued a full disposition to suspend the business of trucking transport business (hereinafter “instant disposition to suspend the business”) for 60 days (hereinafter “instant disposition to suspend the business”) based on Article 19(1)2 of the Trucking Transport Business Act (hereinafter “ Trucking Transport Business Act”) and Article 5(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Trucking Transport Business Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26251, May 26, 2015; hereinafter “former Enforcement Decree of the Trucking Transport Business Act”) on the ground that the Plaintiff changed the permissible special-use truck to a limited-use truck through the scrapping of the instant car, which constitutes an amendment to the permitted permit without obtaining permission for the change.

On January 7, 2014, the Defendant again issued a disposition to revoke permission for trucking transport business (hereinafter “instant disposition to revoke permission”) pursuant to Article 19(1)10 of the Trucking Transport Business Act and Article 5(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Trucking Transport Business Act on the ground that “the Plaintiff was engaged in trucking transport business during the entire suspension period of the pertinent business in violation of the instant disposition to suspend the business.”

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 and 2.

arrow