A. The Plaintiff has operated the relevant route (hereinafter referred to as “instant route”) by the Defendant or the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs as indicated in the following table, with its main office located in the door-ro 72, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Chungcheongnam-si and operated the urban bus transport business after obtaining a license for passenger transport business. Each of the relevant routes has been approved by the Defendant or the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime

B. On March 4, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for temporary closure of passenger transport business with the Defendant to suspend the operation of each route of this case for one year, on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s operation of each route of this case for the convenience of public transport by the Pakistan citizens, but it cannot be reduced to enormous financial personnel.

C. On March 7, 2014, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s application for the suspension of business for each of the instant routes on the grounds that the matters concerning the suspension of business are under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs with respect to the route approved by the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs among the instant routes, on the grounds that alternative means of transportation are insufficient and that citizen inconvenience is expected to be greatly increased.

As to the Plaintiff from March 17, 2014 to June 16, 2014, the Defendant: (a) the Plaintiff did not operate each of the instant routes even the refusal of the application for suspension of business; and (b) on the ground that the Plaintiff committed each of the relevant acts in the column of “violation of the relevant routes indicated in the column of the “violation of the Route Number” on each date in the column of the “violation of the attached Table No. 1 (hereinafter “Attachment No. 1”) from March 17, 2014 to June 16, 2014, the Passenger Transport Service Act (hereinafter “ Passenger Transport Service Act”) on the ground that:

Article 85(1)12 of the Enforcement Decree of the Passenger Transport Service Act, and the Enforcement Decree of the Passenger Transport Service Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 25525, Jul. 28, 2014; hereinafter referred to as the "Enforcement Decree of the Passenger Transport Service Act").

Article 46(1) [Attachment III, instead of an order to suspend part of the business set forth in the annexed Table 3, shall be the Passenger Transport Service Act.