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

A. The Defendant is a juristic person established pursuant to the Korean Racing Association Act for the purpose of fair implementation of horse racing, etc., and the Plaintiff obtained a skill license from the Defendant and worked as a horse race track from June 18, 2008 to Seoul horse race track.

B. On July 17, 2016, the Defendant: (a) collected intelligence that: (b) the Plaintiff and B received money and valuables from C and participated in the offer of horse information; (c) requested the Plaintiff to investigate the Plaintiff on July 17, 2016; and (d) issued a temporary measure to suspend the Plaintiff from March 18, 2017 to March 18, 2017, or from March 18, 2017 to the date of final determination of sanctions, such as the standing committee, etc.

C. On December 28, 2017, the prosecutor of the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office in the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office purchased the said vehicle through a lease agreement with C on June 12, 2013, on the suspicion of violation of the Korean Racing Association Act that "the Plaintiff was issued one vehicle of 17 million won at the market price after receiving an illegal solicitation of provision of horse information and a deduction of the anticipated horse would have been received from C on June 12, 2013, and obtained economic benefits equivalent to the same amount." However, there was no evidence to verify the receipt of any unlawful solicitation from C, and on the ground that the Plaintiff paid the deposit and rent of the said vehicle, the Plaintiff was subject to a disposition without suspicion (Evidence of evidence shortage).

On February 8, 2018, the Defendant: (a) held a standing committee; (b) revoked the Plaintiff’s license by applying Article 108 Subparag. 23 and 36 of the Marina Enforcement Rule; and (c) notified the Plaintiff on February 27, 2018.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). The grounds for the instant disposition are 35 times between December 1, 2015, and December 7, 2016, 2015, that: (a) the Plaintiff entered into a friendly relationship with the outside customer of light class B, which he/she became aware of with the introduction of light class B; and (b) on the basis of this relationship, he/she received discount benefits at the time of purchase of out-of-land vehicles from the private village of C, as well as B lighting around June 18, 2013.