1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From April 12, 2009 to December 26, 2011, a limited liability company Mangy Road (hereinafter “mangy Road”) used 47 freight cars as indicated in the attached Table 1 (hereinafter “each of the instant freight cars”) to illegally scrap the freight lanes, the supply of which is limited in the same manner as indicated in the attached Table 1.

B. After that, the Plaintiff acquired each of the instant cargo vehicles from the Mangy Korea Port, and completed the report to the competent authorities on the acquisition of the cargo vehicles.

C. On December 16, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition to recover the number plates and pay subsidies to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 3(5) of the Trucking Transport Business Act on the ground that: (a) 60 days of the suspension of operation of illegal vehicles and the redemption of unfair supply and demand subsidies pursuant to Article 3(3) of the Trucking Transport Business Act (hereinafter “ Trucking Transport Business Act”); and (b) 20 vehicles are increased to the supply restriction type, or the change in the type and structure of the vehicle is different.

On February 24, 2016, the Defendant issued a corrective disposition to the Plaintiff on December 16, 2015, regarding 20 vehicles for business use, on the ground of the increase in the number of vehicles among the dispositions taken on December 16, 2015, on the ground of illegal increase in the number of vehicles, pursuant to Article 3(3) of the Trucking Transport Act, on the ground of the suspension of operation of the violating vehicle and the recovery of fuel subsidies, and notified the Plaintiff that the period of suspension of operation of the violating vehicle will run after

(hereinafter the instant disposition to suspend the operation of each of the instant cargo vehicles is deemed to be “the instant disposition to suspend the operation”.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant disposition with the Gwangju District Court 2015Guhap13666 against the instant disposition of suspension of operation, etc., but the said lawsuit was deemed to have been withdrawn on June 23, 2016 due to the absence of the three-time date.

F. On July 4, 2016, the Defendant: (a) set the enforcement period of the instant disposition to August 5, 2016 to October 3, 2016; and (b) set the period from August 5, 2016 to notification.