축산업 영업의 전부정지 3개월 처분 취소청구의 소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
A. The revocation disposition (hereinafter “instant permission revocation disposition”).
The date of revocation of permission on November 30, 2017: Violation on September 8, 2017 (based on the date of notification of investigation results): The legal basis for the violation of permission for alteration and report for alteration by fraud or other improper means: Article 17 (1) 2 of the Livestock Excreta Act (based on the date of notification of investigation results): Article 18 (1) 1 of the Livestock Excreta Act
G. Furthermore, on February 27, 2018, on the premise that the instant permission was revoked, the Defendant issued a disposition ordering the Plaintiff to suspend the entire business for three months in relation to the instant permission, with the following content:
(hereinafter “Disposition”). The disposal period: The violation of the disposition period: from February 27, 2018 to May 28, 2018: The legal ground for the violation of the permission for the alteration of discharge facilities and the report for the alteration thereof by fraudulent or other illegal means: Article 17(1)2 of the Livestock Excreta Act; Article 25(1)7 of the Livestock Industry Act; Article 17(1)1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Livestock Industry Act; Article 15(3) of the Enforcement Rule of the Livestock Industry Act (15(1) 1 of the Standards for Disposition (1)* (1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Livestock Industry Act: The fact that there is no dispute over the whole suspension of business for three months [based on recognition], Gap (1), 2, 3, 4, 10, 28, evidence No. 1, and the whole purport of pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The disposition of this case by the Plaintiff is unlawful on the grounds that the revocation disposition of the permission of this case, which is the premise of the disposition of this case, is unlawful on the following grounds.
1. In giving prior notice of the disposition of revocation of the permission of this case, the Defendant: “The Plaintiff’s farm shall be deemed to have obtained permission for alteration for the expansion of livestock pens and the extension of storage tanks, and shall be deemed to have obtained permission for alteration, and thus, the Plaintiff’s farm shall be deemed to have obtained permission for alteration, and shall be deemed to have obtained permission for alteration, or have filed a report or a report of alteration, by fraudulent or other illegal means, from the time of the relevant administrative agency’s permission for alteration and permission for alteration.”