beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff’s husband B, from November 201, operated the said D as the representative director of “D” (hereinafter “D”) of “D” (hereinafter “D”) located in Seongdong-gu, Seoul. The Plaintiff, as a director of D around December 201, succeeded to the status of petroleum selling business (general retail store) from B, and engages in petroleum selling business in the name of “F” in Geumcheon-gu, Seoul.
(hereinafter “instant retail shop”). (b)
B around 9:45 on September 30, 2014, around 9:45, at the mobile-sale vehicle (G; hereinafter “instant mobile-sale vehicle”) of the instant retail shop, he/she provided 381 liter for automobile transit through the power generator at the construction site (hereinafter “instant site”); immediately after the sale of the instant mobile-sale vehicle, the former North Korea headquarters collected two samples of automobile transit in the front section of the instant mobile-sale vehicle, and conducted the quality inspection on October 17, 2014, “one of the samples of a vehicle for automobile transit (number 2) is mixed with about 40%, and thus, it is determined as fake petroleum products.”
C. The Defendant, prior notice prior to and during the process of submitting opinions against the Plaintiff prior to the disposition suspending the business of fake petroleum products for the reason of the sale of the above fake petroleum products, finds additional facts on the instant mobile-sale vehicle, and applied Article 13(3)8 of the Act, Article 16 of the Enforcement Rule of the Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy No. 147, Jul. 29, 2015; hereinafter the same) on December 9, 2014, on the ground that “the Plaintiff sold fake petroleum products in violation of Article 29(1)1 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (amended by Act No. 13085, Jan. 28, 2015; hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and thereby hindering distribution in violation of Article 39(1)8 of the Act.