beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
Details of the disposition
A. The Plaintiff has run the petroleum sales business with the trade name, i.e., Samsung Heavy Oil Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant gas station”) in 192, in the 192-ro, the sound wing-ro, Gasan-si.
B. On February 28, 2014, the Daejeon Chungcheong Headquarters conducted a control over the gas station in the instant case, and inspected samples collected from the mobile oil selling vehicles owned by the Plaintiff (A; hereinafter “instant selling vehicles”), and confirmed that other petroleum products (e.g., oil, etc.), among 400 liters, were mixed with approximately 25% of the total stock capacity for automobiles, and notified the Defendant of the said fact on March 5, 2014.
C. On March 31, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition of suspension of business 1.5 months (from April 7, 2014 to May 22, 2014) (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Articles 29(1)1 and 13(1)12 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act on the ground that the Plaintiff manufactured fake petroleum products and violated Article 29 of the said Act (hereinafter “petroleum Business Act”), and Article 16 [Attachment 1] of the Enforcement Rule of the said Act.
【In the absence of dispute, Gap 1, 2, 4, and Eul 1 through 3 (including each number). Whether the disposition of the whole purport of the pleading is legitimate or not is legitimate, and fake petroleum products under the Petroleum Business Act which are manufactured for the purpose of using or allowing the use as fuel for cars, machinery (referring to using gasoline or light oil as fuel). The plaintiff is merely a temporary storage in the vehicle before he consumes the remaining oil which inevitably occurred due to the structural limit of mobile-sale vehicle in the course of selling legitimate petroleum products, and it does not have manufactured fake petroleum products for the purpose of using or allowing the use as fuel for vehicles and machinery. Thus, there is no reason for the disposition of this case.
abuse of discretion.