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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. A. Around December 2006, the Defendant: (a) drafted a plan to revitalize brand taxi and call taxi; and (b) drafted a “plan to revitalize brand taxi and call taxi” with the content of converting subsidies from the call center by directly providing them to promote the function of call taxi; (c) the Defendant formulated a plan to revitalize brand call taxi on March 23, 2007; and (d) 4,000 (6,000 vehicles in consideration of secondary operation) based on the number of daily operation under the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Notice No. 2007-569, March 29, 2007, the Defendant established a single call system in brand call to manage the taxi, driver and customer as a database (DB); and (d) designated and recruited the new taxi and the new taxi call service provider in accordance with the instant service manual (hereinafter referred to as “instant public announcement”).

3) On April 4, 2007, the Defendant is required to operate a new brand call taxi (hereinafter “instant operational criteria”).

(2) The call center project explanation meeting of this case was prepared and held. The main contents of the instant operational criteria are as follows: (a) “new brand call taxi” under Article 2(1) of the instant operational criteria refers to a public call taxi designated by the Defendant, meeting the designation criteria set by the Defendant, in order to enable citizens to use it in a convenient and swift manner; and (b) “new brand call taxi call center” under Article 2(1) of the instant operational criteria.

(3) The term “new brand call taxi member” (hereinafter referred to as “ call member”) means a call center operator who becomes an entity operating the call center project of this case officially designated by the Defendant.

L means a corporation and a private taxi that is officially designated by the Defendant as a member of the “new brand call taxi center.”