logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.05.03 2017구합11411
영업허가취소처분취소
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, a juristic person established for the production and sale of organic fertilizers, etc., obtained a comprehensive waste recycling permit from the Defendant for recycling of animal residues and organic sludge.

B. From November 9, 2015 to April 28, 2016, the Defendant was under the suspension of business for six months on the ground that the Plaintiff did not perform the Plaintiff’s license to change the waste disposal business entity.

C. On March 7, 2016, the Defendant: (a) conducted an inspection on the Plaintiff’s place of business; and (b) on May 16, 2017, issued to the Plaintiff a disposition to cancel the Plaintiff’s license for waste disposal business as of May 25, 2017 pursuant to Article 27(1)5 of the Wastes Control Act on the following grounds (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The purpose of the entire pleadings and records of business activities and unauthorized installation of facilities during the period of business suspension - Product production - Interim waste treatment (based on recognition), which is being kept in custody by installing an unauthorized sorting facility (I and II) after screening intermediate processing wastes remaining in the recycling process - interim processing waste treatment (based on recognition), Gap's evidence 1, 2, Eul's evidence 1, 2, and 9 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and all pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff did not process fertilizers during the period of business suspension, and the sold fertilizers during the period of business suspension had already been completed before the period of business suspension, so the sale of such fertilizers does not constitute business during the period of business suspension, and the screening facilities installed and operated by the plaintiff are merely the facilities for screening and packing completed fertilizers, and do not constitute waste disposal facilities.

Therefore, the instant disposition on the ground that the Plaintiff was doing business during the period of suspension of business should be revoked in an unlawful manner.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. As a result of the examination of the evidence and the evidence set forth above, each set of Nos. 3 through 11, and the verification of video CDs in this Court, B. of this Court.

arrow