1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person who operates a general restaurant in the name of “C” in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

B. On May 31, 2015, at around 20:30, the Plaintiff sold alcoholic beverages to D (ma, 17 years old), and E (n, 17 years old) youth at the above restaurant, but was exposed to the Seoul Suwon Police Station.

C. On February 3, 2016, the Defendant: (a) sold alcoholic beverages to juveniles and committed an offense falling under the business suspension period of two months pursuant to Articles 44 and 75 of the Food Sanitation Act; (b) however, on the ground that the Plaintiff was subject to the disposition of suspending indictment, the Defendant mitigated the business suspension period of one month on the ground that he was subject to the disposition of suspending indictment.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul evidence No. 8, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff confirmed the identity card of the son who was born to juveniles, and one of them present another's resident registration certificate which is an adult, and the remaining one was the same as that of others, and they were perceived as adults.

In addition, in light of the fact that he has enough time to do his behavior, he seems to receive the death of any member and let the plaintiff control it.

In light of such regulatory background, in light of the Plaintiff’s efforts to support their parents and overcome their difficult economic situation, the instant disposition is unlawful as it abused discretion.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. Whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms shall be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement of public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to such disposition, by objectively examining the content of the offense as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the relevant circumstances.