영업정지처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. From January 9, 2019, the Plaintiff has operated a general restaurant (hereinafter “instant general restaurant”) with the trade name “D” in the Gyeonggi Ethical City B and C (hereinafter “D”).
B. At around 00:30 on August 6, 2019, Plaintiff E provided the said juveniles and their players with alcoholic beverages worth KRW 16,000 per week market price without verifying the identity card of F, a juvenile at the instant establishment.
(hereinafter “instant violation”). C.
When the Defendant filed a claim for a summary order of KRW 500,000 due to the instant violation of the Juvenile Protection Act, the Defendant: (a) on September 5, 2019; (b) on the ground of the instant violation, pursuant to Articles 44(2) and 75 of the Food Sanitation Act; and (c) Article 89 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, issued a disposition of business suspension for two months (from October 1, 2019 to November 29, 2019).
The plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission, and the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission partially accepted the plaintiff's claim on November 4, 2019, and rendered a ruling to change the two-month business suspension to one month business suspension.
E. In accordance with the above ruling, on November 25, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition of business suspension against the Plaintiff for one month (from December 16, 2019 to January 14, 2020) (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 15-1, 2, Eul evidence 1-12, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) entered the instant business establishment along with Nonparty G who was a youth before the instant business establishment as an adult, and as G belonged to E such as G’s words F, it was difficult for F to find out whether it was a juvenile. Therefore, even if the instant disposition grounds exist, the Plaintiff’s control over the Plaintiff may be considered in the course of the instant violation, such as deceiving the Plaintiff, etc. and allowing the Plaintiff to provide alcoholic beverages, and the Plaintiff has been engaged in the instant business in good faith.