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

A. From May 23, 2005, the Plaintiffs are operating a mutual veterinary hospital of “E” (hereinafter “instant veterinary hospital”) in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-gu.

B. On October 3, 2018, a civil petition was filed on October 3, 2018, stating that “the instant veterinary hospital reports the act of collecting blood, installing a carter, sprinking (floak, beer, beer, beer, and beer) and the act of preparing medicine in the instant veterinary hospital” (hereinafter “the instant pictures and videos”), and the said civil petition was accompanied by the photographs and videos containing the act of collecting blood from animals (open) using the sprinke of the instant veterinary hospital (hereinafter “the instant pictures and videos”), and submitted the pictures and videos (hereinafter “the instant videos”) when distinguishing between the pictures and videos.

Accordingly, as a result of the investigation into the contents of the above civil petition from October 11, 2018 to October 18 of the same month, the Defendant confirmed that the act contained in the instant pictures and videos through the response, etc. by the Plaintiff B is an act of collecting blood for the purpose of inspection of a transshipment (hereinafter “the act of collecting blood in this case”) by F, G, and H (hereinafter “F, etc.”) who is an employee of the instant veterinary hospital, other than a veterinarian.

C. On January 28, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition of business suspension for three months (from February 8, 2019 to May 7, 2019) pursuant to Article 33 Subparag. 2 of the Veterinarians on the ground that the Plaintiffs had an unqualified person provide medical treatment.

The plaintiffs filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the above business suspension with the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission, and on April 29, 2019, the above Administrative Appeals Commission (the above Administrative Appeals Commission) applied for the collection of blood, but did not find any data showing health harm to animals due to the blood collection act of this case, but did not appear to have any special circumstances since the opening of the plaintiffs, and made a disposition of business suspension for three months in light of the circumstances.