1. The Defendant limited to the military transport company on February 24, 2015.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff Bo Young Transportation Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff Bo Young Transportation”) runs the urban bus transportation business from December 31, 1979, and from December 20, 1968 to December 20, 198, the Plaintiff Sam Young Transportation Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff Sam Young Transportation”) runs the urban bus transportation business in areas, such as Ansan-si and Kunpo-si, etc. after obtaining a license for passenger transport business under Article 4 of the Passenger Transport Service Act (hereinafter “passenger Transport Service Act”).

B. On January 30, 2015, the Defendant publicly announced that a new community bus transport business entity is recruited to cope with changes in the demand for public transport and to resolve traffic inconvenience (the receipt period: from February 2, 2015 to February 13, 2015; qualification period: community bus transport business that has its main office as of the date of application: the community bus transport business as of the date of application).

C. On February 24, 2015, the Defendant newly established a route that uses the operation system as indicated in the attached Table 1 operation system pursuant to Article 10 of the Passenger Transport Act and Article 31 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act (hereinafter “instant community bus route”) with respect to military transport (hereinafter “military transport”) on February 24, 2015, notified the result of the following registration of changes (Evidence 1; hereinafter “instant disposition”).

Matters to be modified, the number of vehicles to be registered, the frequency of operation of the route number, the number of vehicles to be 5 to 9, the distance of 5 to 12 to 18 km in the Si-dong Housing Complex- Geum-si Station.

D. Before the instant disposition, Plaintiff Bo Young-gu filed an application for authorization to revise the passenger transport business plan with the content of the division of the route (No. 87, No. 87-1, and No. 87-1, the divided route included the operation system of the village bus of this case) with the Ansan City Mayor, and on February 12, 2015, the Ansan City Mayor filed a request for consultation under Article 5 of the Enforcement Rule of the Passenger Transport Act with the Defendant on February 26, 2015, and on February 26, 2015, the Defendant respondeded to the opinion of “non-approval” in the amendment to the passenger transport business plan.