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

A. From December 1, 2006, the Plaintiff is a person who operates a gas station with the trade name called C gas station in Yangyang-gun B.

B. On November 26, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition of business suspension for three months pursuant to attached Table 1 of Article 16 of the Enforcement Rule of the Petroleum Business Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff, a prohibited act under Article 39(1)8 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (hereinafter “petroleum Business Act”), as follows, was “sale of light oil as fuel such as tea, etc.”

On September 3, 2018, D, the husband of the Plaintiff, sold 20 L (20,000 won at the market price) by having the driver of F vehicle G, who can be used as fuel for a dump truck, with the knowledge that the dump truck would be used as fuel at the C gas station located in Yangyang-gun E.

C. Meanwhile, on November 20, 2018, D received from the Gwangju District Public Prosecutor’s Office a disposition of suspicion (hereinafter “related criminal case”) on the ground that “No evidence was found to prove that G sold dump trucks with knowledge that it would be sold to G,” as to the suspected violation of the Petroleum Business Act (hereinafter “related criminal case”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 12, 15 evidence, Eul evidence 3 through 6 (including each number, hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff did not sell light oil as the fuel for a motor vehicle, etc., as shown in the grounds of the instant disposition.

B. The instant disposition abused discretion.

3. Attached Form of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

4. Determination

A. Sanction against the violation of the 1st administrative law is a sanction, which leads to the objective fact of the violation of the administrative law, in order to achieve the administrative purpose. Therefore, barring any special circumstance, such as where the breach of the duty cannot be caused due to the negligence of the violator, it shall be deemed that there is no intention or negligence on the part of the violator.