1. The Defendant’s “one month of business suspension (from October 21, 2014 to November 20, 2014) and that of the Plaintiff on October 14, 2014.”

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company established on February 19, 2002 and engaged in non-destructive inspection, safety inspection, etc.

B. On April 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a service contract with the Seohae Urban Gas Co., Ltd. (after the change of its trade name to the “Nuri Sea Energy Co., Ltd. in the future of the Co., Ltd.; hereinafter “Nuri Sea Energy”), and the mid-to medium-scale Urban Gas Co., Ltd. in the ASEAN city in May 2013 (hereinafter “medium Urban Gas”), respectively, to perform a non-destructive test on the construction of urban gas pipelines in each of the above companies, and performed a non-destructive test, such as radiation dose and test, at each of the above companies’ workplace.

C. On August 12, 2014, the Defendant conducted a special inspection on the overall radiation safety control against the Plaintiff.

On October 14, 2014, based on the results of the aforementioned special inspection, the Defendant: (a) rendered a disposition on the ground that “the Plaintiff violated Article 59(1) and (3) of the Nuclear Safety Act” (hereinafter referred to as “instant business suspension disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff was “one month of business suspension (from October 21, 2014 to November 20, 2014)”; and (b) 12 months of business suspension (from October 21, 2014 to October 20, 2015)” in the place of temporary use (hereinafter referred to as “instant business suspension disposition”); and (c) the specific grounds for such disposition are as follows:

(2) The following: (a) the reasons are as follows: (b) the term “instant grounds”; and (c) the term “each of the instant grounds for dispositions” is collectively referred to; (b) the workplace radiation safety manager faithfully performs his/her duties in accordance with the safety management regulations and the rules on technical standards for radiation safety management, etc.; (c) the Plaintiff’s employees B, a radiation safety manager of future nuclear energy, worked at the workplace once a week in the office and did not properly perform his/her duties as a safety manager; and (d) the workplace of mid-to medium urban gas on April 22, 2014.