1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

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

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the reasoning of the judgment, is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following cases, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

From the fourth bottom of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, the following shall be added:

The traffic police service management system, which is the internal computer network for the police (hereinafter referred to as the "TS").

B) From the date of notification to the date of revocation of a driver’s license (from July 7, 2016 to the date before the decision is made on August 12, 2016), the “person subject to revocation” was indicated as “person subject to revocation,” and from the date of revocation to September 8, 2016 (from August 12, 2016, until September 9, 2016), “after the starting date of revocation of a driver’s license (after September 9, 2016, at least 0.1% of blood alcohol level, and practice license: 0.05% of blood alcohol level)” respectively. Accordingly, on July 20, 2016, the Seoul Central Police Station added the following content to “a person subject to revocation” as “person subject to revocation,” and thus, the driver’s license of B becomes effective as “person subject to revocation,” and thus, becomes effective.

‘The need for the public interest to establish the order of private taxi transport business by the instant disposition is greater than the disadvantage of the Plaintiff due to the need of public interest.’

2. Conclusion, the first instance judgment is justifiable, and the Plaintiff’s appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.