1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From the 1980s, the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as "China") introduced a travel permission system (ADS and APV) that allows the Chinese government to attract and contact Chinese group tourists only when the countries that concluded an agreement with China have recommended them, in order to control foreign tourism of its own citizens.

On May 198, China designated the Republic of Korea as the "China's Voluntary Tourism State". On June 1998, the representative of the Korean side comprised of the Defendant, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Ministry of Ministry of Justice, and the Ministry of Construction and Transportation-related officers, and the representative of the Chinese side consisting of the national leisure countries in China, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Ministry of Public Safety, and the Minister of Public Safety, respectively, made negotiations on how to implement various relevant issues arising from tourism of Chinese group tourists in the Republic of Korea on June 1998 and on June 27, 2000, signed the Roster containing an agreement following the negotiations (hereinafter referred to as the "Non-Register of this case").

B. According to the records of this case, 66 Chinese travelers were allowed to take full charge of the organization tourism business of the Republic of Korea of Chinese citizens, and these travel agents were selected from among the travel agencies recommended by the Government of the Republic of Korea and entered into a collective tourist invitation contract.

The Defendant established the guidelines for the exclusive tour guide for attracting Chinese organizations and tourists (hereinafter “instant guidelines”) as set out in the Round of this case, and accordingly designated and managed the “exclusive tour guide for attracting Chinese organizations and tourists” (hereinafter “exclusive tour guide”).

C. The Plaintiff was incorporated on October 16, 2012 with the primary purpose of domestic and foreign travel business and general travel business, and was designated as a exclusive travel agent by the Defendant.

While the plaintiff was engaged in the domestic travel business of Chinese organization tourists, the defendant is a non-designated general travel agent as a non-designated general travel agent.