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 runs a petroleum sales business with the trade name called the K station in Gangwonwon B (hereinafter “instant gas station”).

B. On July 10, 2016, the Han River Department collected samples from the back column of the oil tank of the oil delivery vehicle (vehicle number D; hereinafter “instant vehicle”) at the instant gas station, and conducted quality inspections, and confirmed that “other petroleum products (e.g., oil, etc.) are mixed with approximately 35 feet (hereinafter “instant mixed oil”).

C. On February 24, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition suspending business pursuant to Article 13(3) Subparagraph 8 of the former Petroleum Business Act (from March 10, 2017 to April 23, 2017) on the ground that the Plaintiff kept fake petroleum products in violation of Article 29(1)1 of the former Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (Amended by Act No. 14774, Apr. 18, 2017; hereinafter “former Petroleum Business Act”).

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry in Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The oil tank of the instant vehicle without a ground for disposition is divided into front and rear partitions. A part of the oil tanks, such as the valve loaded on the front partitions, which flows into the rear partitions, is mixed with light oil, and the Plaintiff does not intentionally manufacture fake petroleum products, and thus, it cannot be said that the Plaintiff violated Article 29(1)1 of the former Petroleum Business Act. 2) Even if a deviation abuse of discretionary power, the Plaintiff violated Article 29(1)1 of the former Petroleum Business Act.

In light of the fact that the violation period and capacity are insignificant, the disposition of this case is unlawful by abusing discretion.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

(c) Article 2.1 of the former Petroleum Business Act with the existence of a reason for determination 1.