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

A. A. On April 22, 2003, B acquired a D Kinging practice room (hereinafter “instant King practice room”) located in the building located in the Nam-gu Busan metropolitan area, and changed the name of the representative on January 30, 2013, while operating it as the representative, to the Plaintiff, one of his own children.

B. On January 29, 2014, around 23:30 on January 29, 2014, the head of Busan Southern Police Station rendered ten cans for beer and notified the Defendant of the fact that the Plaintiff violated the obligations of the business operator, and on February 25, 2014, the Defendant rendered ten cans for beer and notified the Defendant of the fact that the business operator violated the obligations. On March 1, 2014, the Defendant

3. Around 00:50 on March 1, 2014 during the period of suspension of business, the Plaintiff was found to be “a business during the period of suspension of business,” and the Defendant was found to be “a business during the period of suspension of business, such as storage of alcoholic beverages, implied entry of alcoholic beverages, or suspension of business,” and on May 2, 2014, the Plaintiff’s disposition revoking the registration of the instant karaoke machine for business reasons during the period of suspension of business (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[The facts that there is no dispute over the basis for recognition, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 2-4, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff, on February 28, 2014, argued that the absence of the grounds for disposition, 3 men and 1 female members talked about the situation that they need to close a door with customers and took a position after obtaining the consent. Although the business hours are different, it was controlled on the wind that they want to play more than once while under the influence of alcohol, and more than 30 hours have passed since the control police officers explain the circumstances. The instant disposition based on the premise that it is business during the period of suspension of business was illegal. 2) The Plaintiff did not receive customers with the intent to conduct business during the period of suspension of business, and the Plaintiff was found at the time of the control of the instant case.