1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Details of the disposition

Around June 2004, the three-story motor vehicle management facilities (hereinafter “J”) of the general steel structure were completed on the Daejeon P and I’s ground. The plaintiffs are owners of the business offices owned by the plaintiffs (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the business offices of this case”). The plaintiffs are owners of the two-story 225, 211, 236, 228, 208, 232, and 330 of the J (hereinafter referred to as “the business offices of this case”).

The Plaintiffs filed an application for registration of automobile management business (sales business) with the Defendant to run the automobile management business directly at the instant place of business, and the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s application for registration on December 4, 2015 for Plaintiff A, B, C, D, and E, Plaintiff F on December 23, 2015, and on January 7, 2016, for Plaintiff G on the ground that “the total floor area of exhibition facilities falls short of the registration standards (60 square meters) under Article 53 of the Automobile Management Act and the attached Table 1 of the Ordinance on the Registration Standards for the Automobile Management Business of Daejeon Metropolitan City” (Article 53 of the Automobile Management Act and attached Table 1).

(2) On November 23, 2012, the Enforcement Rule of the Automobile Management Act amended on November 23, 2012, amended on the following grounds: (a) there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition [the grounds for recognition]; (b) the entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2 (including the serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply); and (c) the purport of the entire argument of the instant disposition is legitimate; (d) strengthens the size of exhibition facilities from among the registration criteria of the automobile management business (trade business) to at least 660 square meters; and (e) Article 3 of the Addenda provides for a transitional provision that “where the automobile management business is registered

Since the instant business office is completed in 2004 and has been used as an office for the automobile management business in accordance with the previous provisions, the application for registration of automobile transaction business using the instant business office as an office shall be accepted in accordance with the previous provisions.

Nevertheless, the defendant shall have the place of business of this case as an office for the reason that it does not meet the criteria for the size of exhibition facilities by applying the revised provisions.