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

A. The Plaintiff, a business title of “C” located in the Seogu-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B, was controlled as a brokerage for commercial sex acts (from November 27, 2014 to September 11, 2015), and was subject to a disposition for the suspension of business on June 13, 2016 by the Defendant.

B. The above main points were operated by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff’s children were convicted of the instant violation in criminal cases, and became final and conclusive.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion is not specialized in arranging sexual traffic, and that it is anticipated that living is difficult due to the suspension of business for three months, the instant disposition is a deviation or abuse of discretionary authority.

B. (1) In full view of the following circumstances that can be recognized by the evidence presented above, the need for public interest to achieve the disposition of this case, even if considering the various circumstances of the Plaintiff’s internal tax credit, cannot be deemed to be less than the disadvantages the Plaintiff would suffer.

The instant disposition is within the criteria for disposition prescribed by relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as Article 75 of the Food Sanitation Act, and the said criteria do not in itself conform with the Constitution or laws, or it cannot be deemed that the result of the said disposition is considerably unreasonable in light of the content of the offense and the relevant Acts and

According to the above administrative disposition criteria, the instant violation constitutes three months of business suspension.

It is not short that the period for arranging commercial sex acts is shorter.

The purpose of eradicating sexual traffic can be achieved by strictly punishing various acts that facilitate sexual traffic, such as arranging sexual traffic and providing places of sexual traffic.

(2) Therefore, the instant disposition imposed on the Plaintiff is lawful.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.