目前,我国的驾校培训市场是政府批准的产物,这一产物导致驾培市场实际上是一个相当封闭的,甚至是“供应不足,僧多粥少”的市场,即“伪市场”。驾校不法提价,是驾培市场过度垄断的表现。行政法上类似于驾校强制培训红头文件的行政规范性文件往往由于其抽象行政行为的身份而避开了行政诉讼的救济方式。行政权力的滥用,排除、限制竞争的行为,是反垄断法明确规定的垄断行为。尽管行政垄断和经济垄断在众多方面有不同,但是将驾校强制培训的抽象行政行为进行反垄断法分析将有利于维护市场的自由竞争和经济的良好发展,对完善反垄断法具有积极意义。 At present, the driving school training market in our country is a product approved by the government. As a result, the product market is actually a rather closed market. It is even a market where the supply is inadequate and the market is too small. Driving illegal price increases, driving the market over-monopoly performance. Administrative normative documents that are similar to driving compulsory training in driving law often avoid the remedy of administrative litigation because of their abstract administrative act. Abuse, exclusion and restriction of administrative power are monopolistic acts clearly stipulated in the anti-monopoly law. Although there are many differences between administrative monopoly and economic monopoly, the antitrust analysis of the abstract administrative behaviors of mandatory training in driving a school will be conducive to safeguarding the free competition in the market and the sound development of the economy, and will have positive significance in perfecting the anti-monopoly law.