logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 2015.12.03 2015누72
영업정지처분취소
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Details of the disposition

A. From around 2000, the Plaintiff is running a food manufacturing business, such as salted fish of kimchi, with the trade name of “ecine food” in the 913-8, Gwangju Mine-dong, Gwangju Mine-dong.

B. On July 23, 2012, the Defendant issued a corrective order under Article 4 subparag. 3, 7(4), 75, and 71 of the former Food Sanitation Act (amended by Act No. 11690, Mar. 23, 2013; hereinafter the same) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “17 among the students of the Gwangju Gwangju High School, 54 among the students of the Gwangju High School (hereinafter “the instant accident”), was detected from the kimchi and underground water that the Plaintiff manufactured and sold as a result of an epidemiological investigation pertaining to the instant accident,” and issued a corrective order for the suspension of business for three months (from August 16, 2012 to November 15, 2012).

C. In response to the Plaintiff’s objection and filing an administrative appeal on August 8, 2012, Gwangju Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling to change the period of business suspension to one month of business suspension on November 12, 2012. Accordingly, on November 21, 2012, the Defendant issued a modified disposition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to change the period of business suspension to one month (one month from December 12 to January 10, 2012) pursuant to Articles 4 and 75 of the former Food Sanitation Act to the Plaintiff on November 21, 2012 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

【In the absence of dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 3 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings, and the violation of the laws and regulations against the plaintiff’s assertion of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, the case is the case where food materials are discovered by old viruss discovered from ground water, so the food materials are directly and clearly regulated about old viruss, and Article 7(4) of the former Food Sanitation Act and Article 89 [Attachment 23] of the former Enforcement Rule of the Food Sanitation Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 131, Jun. 29, 2012) (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 131, 2012).

arrow