영업정지처분취소 등
1. The part concerning a request for revocation of the imposition of an administrative fine among the instant lawsuits is dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's remaining claims.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On May 7, 2014, the Plaintiff, while running the instant building with the trade name “C” as the first “D”, changed the trade name to “C”.
A person who runs a dan business in his/her trade name.
(hereinafter “instant place of business”). B.
On December 31, 2013, the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to repair the facilities for the following reasons:
(hereinafter “Order to repair the instant facilities” (hereinafter referred to as “instant order”). A business operator who installs the first disposition of violation of facility standards, sound and reflective facilities shall be equipped with soundproof devices, etc. that meet the standards for the regulation of living noise and vibration under Article 21 of the Noise and Vibration Control Act, but, as a result of noise measurement conducted on December 28, 2013, 23:20 to December 29, 2013, 203, 5dB exceeding 45dB on December 29, 2013, - Grounds for violation of the relevant Act and subordinate statutes: Article 36(1) of the Food Sanitation Act - Grounds for disposition under Articles 74 and 75 of the Food Sanitation Act.
C. On October 16, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition of business suspension 15 days (from October 31, 2014 to November 14, 2014) for the following reasons to the Plaintiff:
(hereinafter “instant business suspension disposition”). According to the provisions of Article 36 of the Food Sanitation Act, a business operator who installs sound and reflective facilities shall be equipped with soundproof devices that meet the noise and vibration control standards, but on August 28, 2014, the evidence No. 1 written on August 26, 2014 appears to be a clerical error, as it is written on August 26, 2014.
As a result of noise measurement on the instant workplaces from 00:07 to 04:20, the certificate No. 1 of noise control level 45dB is indicated as 40dB, and it seems that it is a clerical error.
Article 36 of the Food Sanitation Act - Article 75 of the Food Sanitation Act
D. On October 30, 2014, the Defendant imposed an administrative fine of KRW 2 million on the Plaintiff on the following grounds:
b.0.0 c.