Whether an order to return a private taxi transport business license, etc. is an administrative disposition (negative)

The order of return of private taxi transport business license, etc. is an act that does not result in the change of legal status such as load without the recommendation as a notification of concept, so it is not an administrative disposition subject to administrative litigation.

Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Plaintiff 1 and one other

Head of Gun;

The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

On February 16, 1983, the order issued by the defendant to return a private taxi transport business license, a motor vehicle registration number plate, and a motor vehicle inspection certificate against the plaintiffs shall be revoked.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant.

The plaintiffs' legal representative asserted that the defendant issued an order to return private taxi transportation business license, automobile registration number plate, and vehicle inspection certificate on February 16, 1983 on the ground that the above license was revoked for private taxi transportation business by the Do governor, the right holder to revoke the transportation business license, and that there was no reason to revoke the above license, but the defendant issued an order to return private taxi transportation business license, automobile registration number plate, and vehicle inspection certificate on February 16, 1983. Thus, the above order to return is null and void as it is illegal even if it is not so, it cannot be viewed that the above order to return the above transportation business license, etc. issued by the defendant against the plaintiffs is an administrative disposition subject to administrative litigation, so the lawsuit of this case should not be dismissed. Thus, the administrative disposition subject to administrative litigation is an act under the public law of the administrative agency, which imposes a burden on the rights or obligations under the law, and it cannot be acknowledged that the defendant did not directly conflict with the rights and obligations of the public, such as other acts giving rise to the legal effect of the plaintiffs.

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case seeking the revocation of the above return order as an administrative disposition is unlawful, it shall be dismissed, and the costs of lawsuit shall be assessed against the plaintiffs who have lost. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judge Seo-dae (Presiding Judge)