1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 21, 2006, the Plaintiff obtained a license for maritime passenger transportation services (port route C, name of vessel: D) from the Defendant, and obtained a license for regular passenger transportation services (port route F, name of vessel: G) on May 22, 2017 from the Defendant in order to separate and operate the roadway line that operates by distinguishing the roadway line that operates from the roadway line that operates. In order to operate, the Plaintiff obtained a license for regular passenger transportation services (port route B, name of vessel: H; hereinafter “instant license”).

B. On the B service route, not only the Plaintiff but also I Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “I”) had been operating with a license for marine passenger transportation services from the Defendant. However, the Plaintiff, I, and J Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “J”) agreed on August 30, 2017 with the same agreement as “Agreement on the Adjustment of Operational Hours of Passenger Ships on the B service Routes” (hereinafter “instant agreement”) in the attached Form, when I decided to additionally introduce the vehicular line, other than the off-speed line that was previously operated in 2017, leading to the situation where it is necessary to coordinate the starting time of the Incheon Navigation between the Plaintiff and each other.

C. In accordance with the agreement of this case, the Plaintiff prepared one comfortable line of 200 people (K; hereinafter referred to as “instant vessel”) in order to put off the comfortable speed line on the B route, and on August 14, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for the authorization of the modification of the scheduled coastal passenger transportation services with the content of the instant vessel replacing the existing comfortable line (L) operated by I on the B route to the Defendant (one day: two kings per day, but the weekends, holidays, special transportation period, etc.).

On August 29, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting the Plaintiff’s application on the ground that the Plaintiff’s application for change of business plan did not meet the requirements under Article 5 of the Marine Transportation Act and Article 8 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The vessel of this case which intends to put into the service route is already in operation.