2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The Plaintiff is a person engaging in driving service of taxi drivers and B-cabs for luminous transport (hereinafter “instant taxi”) belonging to the luminous Transport Business Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Gwanpy Transport”) that operates a taxi transport business using the Yanan-si as its business area.

나. 원고는 2016. 6. 17. 22:00경 아산시 탕정면 소재 트라팰리스 아파트 맞은편 C식당 앞 도로상에서 승객 2명을 태우고 천안으로 이동하려는 것을 아산시 소속 단속반에게 적발되었고, 이에 피고는 2016. 8. 13. 원고에게 광복운송의 사업구역 외에서 영업을 했다는 이유로, 광복운송에 갑 제1호증의 기재에 의하면 이 사건 처분 납부고지서는 ‘광복운송’ 앞으로 송달되었고, 위 납부고지서상 과징금의 납부자 또한 ‘광복운송’으로 기재되어 있다.

The penalty surcharge of KRW 200,000 was imposed (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant taxi was stopped due to the stop of the previous vehicle while the Plaintiff moved the passengers from the astronomical city to the arche City, and turned the passengers to the arche City.

At this time, two passengers aboard the taxi of this case and the plaintiff was informed that the taxi of this case is a vehicle that is located in the business area in the Yanan City, the taxi of this case was exposed to Asan City control officials.

As such, the mere act of simply boarding passengers outside the business area can not be seen as a "business outside the business area" under the Passenger Transport Service Act.

Nevertheless, the instant disposition, which had different premise, should be revoked as it is unlawful.

3. Prior to determining the Plaintiff’s assertion, we examine ex officio the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

Administrative litigation is revoked by an administrative agency.