A. Criteria for determining whether a “serious traffic accident” under Article 31 subparag. 5 of the Automobile Transport Business Act is a “serious traffic accident”

(b) The nature of the Rules (Ordinance of the Ministry of Transport and Maritime Affairs No. 724 of July 31, 1982) concerning the disposition of cancellation, etc. of business licenses under Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act

A. Whether it constitutes a "serious traffic accident" under Article 31 subparagraph 5 of the Automobile Transport Business Act shall be determined by considering the contents and results of the act, such as the degree of negligence of the person who caused the traffic accident and the victim, circumstances of the accident, damage situations, impact on the general society, etc.

B. The Rules on the Disposition, etc. of Revocation, etc. of Automobile Transport Business License under Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act (Ordinance No. 724, Jul. 31, 1982) are merely an administrative order that sets forth the standards for revocation, etc. of Automobile Transport Business License and the administrative rules for disposition procedures, etc. in the administrative agency, based on the nature and substance of the provisions, and therefore, it is not a restraint upon the relevant administrative agency or employees, and it is not externally binding upon the people or the court within the administrative organization. Thus, the legality of the disposition of revocation, etc. of Automobile Transport Business License should not be determined depending on whether it conforms to the above

Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act

B. Supreme Court Decision 83Nu551 delivered on February 28, 1984, 83Nu378 delivered on March 13, 1984

[Defendant-Appellee] Attorneys Yoon Young-han et al.

Attorney Lee Jong-ho et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 85Gu1213 decided July 4, 1986

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against each party.

Each ground of appeal by the plaintiff's agent and the defendant's agent are also examined.

Since Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act provides that "when a large number of casualties is caused" due to "serious traffic accidents", it shall be clear that the cause of causing a large number of casualties is a serious traffic accident, and the issue of whether the cause of causing a large number of casualties is a "large traffic accident" shall be determined by considering the contents and results of the act, such as the degree of negligence of the person who caused the traffic accident and the victim, the background of the accident, the damage situations, and the impact on the general society.

In addition, the Rules on the Disposition of Revocation, etc. of Automobile Transport Business License under Article 31 of the Automobile Transport Business Act (Ordinance No. 724, Jul. 31, 1982) is merely an administrative order that provides the criteria for revocation, etc. of Automobile Transport Business License and the administrative rules for disposition procedures, etc., in light of the nature and contents of the regulations, and therefore, it is not externally binding upon the relevant administrative agencies or employees in the administrative organization, and thus, it does not externally restrict the citizens or courts. Thus, the legality of the disposition of revocation of automobile Transport Business License, etc. should not be determined according to whether it conforms to the above regulations, but it should be determined according to the provisions and intent of the Automobile Transport Business Act (see Supreme Court Decision 83Nu378, Mar. 13, 1984; 83Nu551, Feb. 28, 1984).

On the ground of its reasoning, the judgment of the court below: around July 8, 1985.8.02:00 of the non-party 15 passengers on the part of the plaintiff-owned sports 9m9031, the driver of the non-party 9m9031, which is the driver of the non-party 12 passenger on the part of the plaintiff-owned sports 9m90.02:0, the 170.3m of the 170m of the Sin-dong Highway at around 06:30 on the 170m of the 170m of the 5m of the 19.3m of the Sin-dong Expressway; the 12m of the 12 passenger on the part of the 17m of the 19.0m of the 19m of the 19.2m of the 2m of the 2m of the 2m of the 2m of the 3m of the 3m of the 19.

In light of the records, the fact-finding and measures of the court below are just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the rules of evidence or misunderstanding the legal principles as to the interpretation of the above laws and rules and the scope of discretion, as otherwise alleged by each other.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against each party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices O Sung-sung (Presiding Justice)