영업정지처분취소
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. On May 1, 2015, the Plaintiff is the date of the instant disposition as “ May 1, 2015.”
1. The grounds for the court’s explanation concerning the background of the disposition, the Plaintiff’s assertion, and this part of the pertinent law are as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition or dismissal of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. As such, this part of the judgment is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act,
Part 2 of the Decision of the first instance court (hereinafter referred to as the “Disposition”) in addition to the “Disposition” in Part 11 of the Decision of the second instance (hereinafter referred to as the “Disposition of this case”) and the second through 16 of the Decision of the first instance as follows.
E. On July 7, 2015, the Defendant again notified the Plaintiff of the instant disposition, specifying that the period of business suspension is from July 22, 2015 to August 5, 2015, according to the dismissal ruling by the relevant Incheon Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission.
Nos. 3 through 8 of the judgment of the first instance court as follows: ① On-site access investigation report was not sent to the Plaintiff at the time of control; ② public officials did not comply with the procedure that must carry a certificate indicating their authority and present it to the interested parties; ② parents participated in the control without any legal basis; ③ public officials moved to a food warehouse without any process of inspecting documents, etc.; ③ have notified the Defendant of the fact without giving the opportunity to explain to the Plaintiff that the product of this case was not sold; ④ public officials did not record the result in the records, such as entry and inspection kept by the Plaintiff, but the office of education did not attach a confirmation document in Article 10 and attached Form 7 of the Enforcement Rule of the School Meals Act, and procedural errors in the procedure of requesting the disposition of this case to the Defendant without attaching the confirmation document.
2. Determination of the absence of the grounds for disposition is based on Article 44(1) of the Food Sanitation Act.