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

On April 27, 2005, the Plaintiff reported the general restaurant business to the Defendant on the location of the place of business as “Gangwon-gun B” (hereinafter “instant place of business”) and the area of the place of business as “Gangwon-gun B” (hereinafter “instant place of business”) and operated the instant place of business from that time.

On December 1, 2017, the Defendant issued a corrective order to the Plaintiff to correct such unlawful state until December 31, 2017, pursuant to Articles 37 and 71 of the Food Sanitation Act and Article 26 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, on the ground that the Plaintiff did not report the change of the business area from 89.9 cubic meters to 131.75 cubic meters by expanding the business area of the instant business site from 41.76 cubic meters.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case’s disposition”). [The ground for recognition] did not dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 and 5 (including provisional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the entire argument as to the legitimacy of the disposition in this case’s disposition, the summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion as to whether the disposition in this case is legitimate or not, of 89.9 meters which is the subject of the disposition in this case’s disposition, the Defendant was not at issue at the time of the Plaintiff’s spouse’s commencement of restaurant business at the time of the Plaintiff’s spouse’s commencement of restaurant business at the instant place of business around December 1998. Since the non-reported portion’s 16.2 square meters out of the warehouse was a legitimate building that was extended on April 26, 201 and obtained for use. Thus, the disposition in this case

It shall be as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

Judgment

However, it is insufficient to recognize that most of the unreported areas subject to the instant disposition 89.99 cubic meters have been used as a place of business from the time of the first business report, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge such fact. If the Plaintiff reported the area of a general restaurant business at the time of reporting general restaurant business, as long as it reported the area of a place of business at 41.76 square meters, such circumstance alone does not make a proper report on the area of the place of business.