1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

. Details of the disposition; and

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that registered the management business of rearrangement projects pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), and enters into a work agreement with the full-time manpower B (representative director of the Plaintiff), C, and D, and E (hereinafter “E”), a field-based law firm, and a field-based law firm for joint performance of rearrangement projects.

B. On July 5, 2016, the Defendant ordered the management entity specialized in improvement projects registered in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, including the Plaintiff, to submit materials regarding capital and technical human resources as follows in order to verify whether they comply with the registration standards:

(3) A written confirmation that the agreement with the juristic person is valid until now, as well as the agreement on the conclusion of the business agreement with the juristic person, is valid, as the document verifying whether the technical human resources registered in the register for the rearrangement project management business under the conditions that the total amount of capital is at least KRW 500 million, can be recognized as permanent workers through the verification of the following documents submitted by the original company.

C. On July 18, 2017, the Defendant issued a one-year suspension of business from July 24, 2017 to July 23, 2018 pursuant to Article 73(1) of the Urban Improvement Act on the ground that the “certification of technical human resources not meeting the registration standards and not submitted within the time limit” to the Plaintiff as a violation of Article 73(1).

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) According to Article 66 [Attachment 5] of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas, the plaintiff's assertion 1) the case of falling short of the registration standard for more than three months is one year.