2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff.

A. On November 30, 2009, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the cancellation of the prohibited act and facilities in the school environmental sanitation cleanup zone (hereinafter referred to as "application for the rescission of this case") pursuant to the proviso of Article 6 (1) of the School Health Act for the purpose of running the billiard business in the school environmental sanitation and cleanup zone (hereinafter referred to as the "place of business of this case") located in the school environmental sanitation and cleanup zone of the Orsidong-dong, Guro-gu, Seoul, and the second floor of 116 square meters above the ground of the third floor (hereinafter referred to as the "place of business of this case") in accordance with the proviso of Article 6 (1) of the School Health Act.

B. Accordingly, under the proviso of Article 6 (1) of the School Health Act, the Defendant had the school environmental sanitation cleanup committee deliberate on the application for cancellation of this case. The above committee rejected the application for cancellation of this case, and on December 8, 2009, issued a disposition of refusal to prohibit prohibited acts and revoke facilities in the Cleanup Zone (hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case").

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 3 and 4, and all pleadings 2. Whether the disposition of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff's assertion

1) In rendering the instant disposition, the Defendant did not present the grounds and reasons for the instant disposition under Article 23(1) of the Administrative Procedures Act. Therefore, the instant disposition is procedural errors.

2) The road in front of the instant business site is difficult to be deemed as the main school of the students of the Ori Elementary School, the Limited Industrial High School, and the Sbed. The principal of the instant business site presented his opinion that the students’ freedom of choosing their occupation and the exercise of property rights are excessively restricted due to the instant disposition, and the Defendant’s disposition is unlawful since it deviates from and abused discretion, in light of the following: (a) the building is in close vicinity to the instant business site; (b) the party headquarters is already installed in the church located in the vicinity of the instant business site; and (c) anyone can use the road; and (d) the party headquarters has changed the perception that juveniles can develop their abilities according to their aptitude; and (e) the party headquarters cannot be deemed as sports facilities; and (e) the Plaintiff’s freedom of occupation and the exercise of property rights are excessively restricted.

(b) Relevant statutes;

As shown in the attached Form.

(c) Facts of recognition;

1) The location, etc. of the instant place of business

A) The instant business site is located on the second floor of the 3rd floor of the building on the ground, 135 meters away from the entrance, 39 meters away from the boundary line, 133 meters from the entrance, 87 meters from the boundary line, and 135 meters away from the entrance and boundary line of the luxro school, as a straight line.

B) The instant place of business cannot be seen as a lux school, a lux school, and a lux school, but its inside in a limited industrial high school, the entrance is visible, and it is divided into six lanes from the above schools.

2) The result of the opinion study on the head of the Oral Elementary School, the head of the Limited Industrial High School, and the head of the Sungbed School

A) The principals of the schools presented the opinion that 20 of 620 students of the Oral Elementary School will use the road in front of the instant business site as a general school (including school buses) among 180 students of the Jbed School and 150 of 180 students of the Jbed School (including school buses) among 620 students of the Oral High School.

B) In addition, the head of a limited technical high school and the head of a sexual bed school present their opinions that students do not interfere with study and school health and sanitation even if they operate a billiard at the instant business site. However, the head of an Oral elementary school presented opinions that students do not interfere with students’ study and school health and sanitation, but they are likely to have an indirect impact on the educational environment if access by higher school students is frequent.

C) Most of the students, etc. use a bus or subway (sea water) on the bus stops or subway stations in the above schools, adjacent to the bus stops or subway stations (as a result of the Defendant’s investigation conducted on March 17, 2010, 190 students of a limited industry high school are going to and from the bus stops, 220 students of the above underground rail stations are going to and from the above bus stops, and 220 students of the above underground rail stations are actually going to and from the above bus stops.

3) Results of deliberation by the School Environmental Sanitation and Cleanup Committee under Defendant’s jurisdiction

On December 8, 2009, the School Environmental Sanitation and Cleanup Committee under the defendant's jurisdiction deliberated on the application for the rescission of this case on the basis of the results of the opinion survey on the head of the Oral Elementary School, the LLC, and the head of the Sungbed School on December 8, 2009, and rejected the application for rescission of this case according to the opinion of 12 members among 14 members.

4) Other circumstances

A) On the building located in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 108-74, which is a part of the instant business site, the headquarters of the trade name "university club" is operated by the party branch of the university. This is the case on September 15, 200; on July 5, 2001; on June 21, 2007, an application was filed for prohibition and facility cancellation in the school environmental sanitation and cleanup zone on three occasions, but the application was rejected (the above party branch is operated unlawfully despite the above refusal disposition).

B) In the vicinity of the instant place of business, a party hall may be installed and used by anyone. This is being installed and operated for missionary work in the said church.

[Ground of recognition] The aforementioned evidence, Gap evidence Nos. 2 through 6, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 6 through 11, and English evidence Nos. 2, 6 through 11, and the award

D. Determination

1) As to the first argument

Article 23(1) of the Administrative Procedures Act provides that an administrative agency shall present the basis and reasons for the disposition to the parties when rendering a disposition. In general, when the parties refuse to grant permission by specifying the basis and reasons for the disposition, even if the grounds and reasons for the disposition are not clearly stated in the previous contents, if the parties were to know the grounds and reasons for the refusal, it cannot be said that the disposition is unlawful.

However, according to the evidence Nos. 1 and 1 evidence, the plaintiff filed an application for the rescission of this case with the ground provision specified, and the defendant rejected the application of this case after deliberation by the School Environmental Sanitation and Cleanup Committee pursuant to the proviso of Article 6(1) of the School Health Act, and it can be acknowledged that the disposition of this case was rendered. In light of the above facts acknowledged, it is reasonable to view that the plaintiff as the plaintiff did not constitute an act or facility which does not adversely affect the study and school health of students in the Cleanup Zone pursuant to the proviso of Article 6(1) of the School Health Act, and it was rejected through deliberation by the Committee.

Therefore, the instant disposition may be deemed to have been placed for a considerable reason to the extent that the grounds and reasons thereof can be known, and thus, it cannot be said that there was any defect in the instant disposition in violation of Article 23 of the Administrative Procedures Act, not giving rise to the grounds and reasons.

2) As to the second argument

In light of the above facts, the place of business of this case is 41 meters away from the entrance of the off elementary school, 39 meters away from the boundary line, and is located on 2nd floor of a building without any distance of 87 through 135 meters away from the entrance or boundary line of the high school or the Sung bed, and is used by a large number of students, such as 20 persons of the front road, 200 high schools, 150 students of the Sung bedon school, and 150 students of the front road as their main school or general school, and it is difficult to see that the Plaintiff’s application for prohibited acts such as school health and hygiene of the students of this case is not likely to affect the students’ study and school health and sanitation even if the business of the front school in this case is operated by the front school, or that it is difficult to see that it is likely that the Plaintiff’s application for prohibited acts such as school health and hygiene of the school in this case, because of frequent opinion of the students.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit.

Judges

Judges 000

[School Health Act]

Article 5 (Establishment of School Environmental Sanitation and Cleanup Zone)

(1) In order to protect health, sanitation, and learning environments in schools, the Superintendent of an Office of Education shall establish and publicly announce a school environmental sanitation and cleanup zone, as prescribed by Presidential Decree. In such cases, the school environmental sanitation and cleanup zone shall not exceed 200 meters from the boundary line of a school warning line or of a planned school site.

(5) The authority of the superintendent of each district office of education under paragraph (1) may be delegated to the head of each district office of education, as prescribed by Presidential Decree.

(1) No one shall engage in any act or facility falling under any of the following subparagraphs in a school environmental sanitation and cleanup zone: Provided, That acts and facilities deemed not to have any adverse effect on learning and school health and sanitation through deliberation by the school environmental sanitation and cleanup committee by the Superintendent of an Office of Education or any person delegated by the Superintendent of an Office of Education among acts and facilities prescribed in subparagraphs 2, 3, 6, 10, 12 through 18 and 20 shall be excluded from the areas prescribed by Presidential Decree:

14. A billiard (excluding school environmental sanitation and cleanup zones of kindergartens pursuant to subparagraph 2 of Article 2 of the Early Childhood Education Act and of schools pursuant to the subparagraphs of Article 2 of the Higher Education Act);

[Enforcement Decree of the School Health Act]

Article 3 (School Environmental Sanitation and Cleanup Zone)

(1) Where the Superintendent of an Office of Education establishes a school environmental sanitation and cleanup zone (hereinafter referred to as the " Cleanup Zone") pursuant to Article 5 (1) of the Act, it shall be established by dividing it into the absolute Cleanup Zone and the relative Cleanup Zone, but the absolute Cleanup Zone shall be an area within 50 meters from the entrance door of a school (in cases of a planned school site, referring to the location in which the entrance door of a school to be established) to the direct election Ri, and the relative Cleanup Zone shall be an area excluding the absolute Cleanup Zone, from among areas within 200 meters from the boundary line of a school or the boundary line

Article 5 (Zone where Restriction is Relaxed)

"Areas prescribed by Presidential Decree" in the proviso to the part other than the subparagraphs of Article 6 (1) of the Act means the relative Cleanup Zone under Article 3 (1) (where a billiard room is installed pursuant to Article 6 (1) 14 of the Act, referring to the whole Cleanup Zone including the absolute Cleanup Zone). Finally.