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 petroleum retail station under the trade name called “C gas station” in Jeonnam-gun B (hereinafter “instant gas station”).

B. On May 19, 2015, the former North Korea Institute, which controlled the gas station in the instant case, inspected samples collected from the D mobile fuel selling vehicles owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant selling vehicles”), confirmed that other petroleum products (e.g., oil, etc.) were mixed with about 10% on the vehicle diesel, and notified the Defendant of the aforementioned fact.

C. On August 19, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition suspending business for three months (from September 1, 2015 to November 30, 2015) pursuant to Article 13 of the Petroleum Business Act and attached Table 16 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act on the ground that “the Plaintiff manufactured, stored, transported, stored, or sold fake petroleum products and violated Article 29 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (hereinafter “instant violation”).

On January 28, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Jeonnam-do Administrative Appeals Commission. On January 28, 2016, the said administrative appeals commission rendered an adjudication to reduce the previous three-month business suspension disposition as one month (hereinafter “instant adjudication”).

E. On March 21, 2016, according to the instant judgment, the Defendant rendered a disposition of 21 days of business suspension (from September 1, 2015 to September 9, 2015), excluding nine days of business suspension (from September 1, 2015 to September 2, 2015), to the Plaintiff on March 21, 2016 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 3 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) Profits that the plaintiff can gain by the violation of this case due to the non-existence of the grounds for disposition are merely 155,600 won (=400L x (1,339 won in transit - 950 won in transit), and the sales vehicle of this case is one.