1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that aims at the transportation business of taxi passengers.

The nine taxi drivers employed by the Plaintiff were subject to an administrative fine, etc. under the Act on the Development of Taxi Transportation Business (hereinafter “the Act on the Development of Taxi Development”) by engaging in the act of refusing passengers or having passengers get off or get passengers get off through the taxi without justifiable grounds between September 29, 2016 and September 29, 2018.

A motor vehicle pertaining to the refusal of taking passengers in the instant case is a total of nine motor vehicles.

(No. 5. Disposition No. 1 on January 27, 2017, No. 1 of the 2018. Disposition No. 1 on May 1, 2017, B, warning on March 16, 2017; D E’s fine for negligence on June 9, 2017; F’s fine for negligence on June 23, 2017; HI on Oct. 12, 2017; warning No. 5548, Aug. 16, 2017; warning No. 2848, Nov. 28, 2017; warning No. 1500, Aug. 16, 2017; warning No. 2895, Nov. 28, 2017; warning No. 15010, Aug. 28, 2017;

B. On December 7, 2018, the Defendant calculated the Plaintiff’s refusal to take passengers on the ground of the instant refusal to take passengers on the ground of “the number of violations” / (number of licensed vehicles) / (number of licensed vehicles) x 5” under Article 21 [Attachment Table 2] of the Enforcement Decree of the taxi Development Act. The number of the Plaintiff’s licensed vehicles owned is 52 (Evidence 11) and the number of violations is 12., on the ground that 1.5 (i.e., 12/52 x 52 x 5, and less than two decimal places) of the taxi development index (i.e., 16(1) and 18(1)4 of the taxi development Act, and Article 21 subparag. 3 [Attachment Table 2] of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.