중국전담여행사 지정취소처분 취소청구
The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.
purport, purport, and.
1. Facts that there is no dispute over the details of the disposition (based on the recognition of the disposition), Gap 1-4, Eul 1, 4, 5 (including branch numbers for those with serial numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings;
A. The People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as "China") has entered into an agreement with a foreign government for the control of its citizens in a tourist destination outside China, and only the travel agent designated by that foreign government shall attract Chinese group tourists.
On May 198, 1998, China designated the Republic of Korea as "China's Voluntary Tourism State," and on June 6, 1998 and June 27, 2000, China's tourism-related ministries and the Defendant made negotiations on implementation plans for various related issues arising from the tourism of the Republic of Korea by Chinese collective tourists, and signed the Roster (hereinafter referred to as "the Roster of this case").
B. According to the records of this case, China had travel agencies in its country take exclusive charge of the organization tourism business of the Republic of Korea of Chinese nationals, and these travel agencies had to select cooperation companies from among travel agencies recommended by the Government of the Republic of Korea and enter into a collective tourist invitation contract.
The defendant shall comply with the Guidelines for the Implementation of Exclusive Tour Business (hereinafter referred to as the "Guidelines") to attract Chinese organizations and tourists as set out in the Round of this case.
Pursuant to the enactment of the Act, the exclusive travel agent exclusively responsible for attracting Chinese organization tourists (hereinafter referred to as “exclusive travel agent”).
The designation and management was made.
C. The Plaintiff was incorporated on May 18, 2005 with the primary purpose of general travel business and domestic and foreign travel business, and was designated as exclusive travel business operator on April 11, 2006 by the Defendant, and was re-designated on December 5, 2013.
The defendant on March 28, 2016, on the ground that "the result of the reexamination for the renewal of exclusive travel operators, as a result of the re-examination for the renewal of the exclusive travel operator, is less than a qualified list, and a report on the performance of the electronic management system is about 0, and 10 points were reduced by administrative disposition."