logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 2020.07.17 2020누10370
영업허가취소처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except that the court's explanation of this case is as follows: "the plaintiff shall complete the above records review; the defendant shall complete the above records review; and the defendant shall be deemed as falling under the fourth below below of the seventh; and the defendant shall be deemed as falling under the fourth below." Thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the first instance court’s rejection of the Plaintiff’s assertion is justifiable. (3) In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the Plaintiff’s assertion in the first instance trial, but did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the Plaintiff’s assertion in the first instance trial.

The judgment of the first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

arrow