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

A. The Plaintiff is a person who operates a general restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) in the name of “C” in Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu.

B. At around 02:00 on July 22, 2019, the Plaintiff’s employee D was exposed to the police due to the violation of the Juvenile Protection Act on the ground that he sold alcoholic beverages to juveniles on the ground that he did not impose any sanctions on drinking water in the cooling house installed in the restaurant without verifying the identity card of the juvenile E and F in the instant restaurant.

C. On January 3, 2020, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the fact of detection by the Incheon Western Police Station, applied Articles 75 and 44 of the Food Sanitation Act to “Provision of Youth Alcoholic Beverages” and imposed two months of business suspension on the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). / [Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 1 through 7 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. Since the Plaintiff’s assertion D did not confirm the identification card by assault or intimidation by juveniles, the administrative disposition should be exempted pursuant to the proviso of Article 75 of the Food Sanitation Act.

In addition, the suspension of business should be mitigated due to minor violations or minor negligence without intention.

The instant disposition that did not consider these circumstances by the Defendant is unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretionary power. Therefore, it should be revoked.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. Whether a single punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms should be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantage suffered by an individual due to the disposition, by objectively examining the content of the act of violation as a ground for the disposition in question, the public interest to be achieved by the act of disposition in question, and all relevant circumstances.