beta
Main Issues
The case holding that the revocation of the license for private taxi transportation business on the ground of proxy driving is lawful
Summary of Judgment
Since a person who has obtained a private taxi transportation business license has not been qualified as an agent for three times or has been allowed to drive on behalf of a disqualified person, if he/she received two times of suspension of operation and revocation of a private taxi transportation business license, such revocation disposition is not illegal.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 31(1)1 of the Automobile Transport Business Act, Article 15(1) and Article 15(3) of the Enforcement Rule of the Automobile Transport Business Act
Plaintiff-Appellant
Plaintiff-Appellee et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant
Defendant-Appellee
Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor
Judgment of the lower court
Seoul High Court Decision 89Gu1584 delivered on June 30, 1989
Notes
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
Due to this reason
We examine the grounds of appeal.
The court below was just by examining the records of the evidence in recognizing the fact that the plaintiff obtained a private taxi transport business license and did not have a qualification as an agent for three times such as the plaintiff, or that the non-qualified non-party 1 and the non-qualified non-party 2 were to be operated on behalf of the plaintiff. Thus, the court below did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations or by failing to exercise the right of explanation, such as the theory of lawsuit.
If the facts are as determined by the court below, the defendant cannot be deemed to have exceeded the discretionary power to revoke the plaintiff's private taxi transport business license on the ground of the plaintiff's vicarious driving by another person. The judgment below to the same purport is just and there is no error of law such as the theory of lawsuit.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Yoon So-young (Presiding Justice)