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 general restaurant operator in the name of “C” in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu and 101.

B. On September 12, 2017, around 21:00, the Plaintiff was discovered to the Nowon Police Station as a result of the Plaintiff’s provision of alcoholic beverages to juvenile D (n, 18 years of age). On October 13, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition imposing a penalty surcharge of KRW 6,900,000 on the Plaintiff (the instant disposition was conducted under the following) in lieu of the business suspension for one month.

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission, but the judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim was rendered on December 11, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 7, Eul evidence 1 to 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the disposition

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) confirmed that three adults, who are adults on the day of the instant case, entered the shop, and provided three sons and liquors, which he ordered, and there was no additional food or alcohol. The Plaintiff did not have any awareness about the fact that the juvenile D(18), which the Plaintiff had entered the most bad time zone, lasted to the gap that the Plaintiff had no yellow dust, and later, had no awareness of the fact that he would offer alcoholic beverages to the Plaintiff as he had already been provided.

Nevertheless, the disposition of this case, which was based only on the result that the juvenile dranks, was illegal because there is no ground for the disposition.

(2) The Plaintiff posted a notice of “not having access to minors” at the entrance of a usual place, and had made best efforts to avoid providing alcoholic beverages to juveniles, such as conducting identification cards, etc. to customers who have entered the shop. The Plaintiff has no ability to take administrative dispositions once in operating a restaurant for about 20 years, and as such, D, a juvenile, was 18 years of age on the day of the instant case, did not reach a few months of the date on which he/she became an adult.