1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including costs incurred by participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a stock company that operates food manufacturing and processing business, etc. by installing a factory, warehouse, etc. on its ground on the land surface of 856-3m20.6m2 (hereinafter “instant site”). As to the goods listed in the [Attachment] list owned by the Plaintiff, including the above site, factory, warehouse, and warehouse (hereinafter “instant goods”), Daejeon District Court Branch A and B (combined) auction procedure for real estate auction (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) was commenced.

B. The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) received a decision of permission for sale on May 4, 2015 in the above auction procedure, and paid the sale price on June 4, 2015, and acquired ownership on the instant goods.

C. On June 24, 2015, an intervenor reported succession to the status of a food manufacturing and processing business operator to the Defendant, and the Defendant issued a disposition to accept the above report on the same day.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 7 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. The Defendant and the Intervenor’s summary of the assertion that the Defendant and the Intervenor: “ insofar as the instant goods owned by the Plaintiff were sold by auction due to the Plaintiff’s failure to obtain a loan, there is no possibility that the Plaintiff maintains the status of food business operators; and in fact, the Plaintiff has already reported the closure of business, and thus there is no legal interest in dispute over the instant disposition. In particular, it is difficult to view that

B. The act of a permitting agency that accepts a report of succession to the status following the transfer of business pursuant to Article 39(3) of the Food Sanitation Act is not merely an act of accepting a report that the transferee succeeds to the business by the legal effect of the transfer of business already occurred between the transferor and the transferee, but also an act of accepting the report.