beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment on the plaintiff's assertion in the court of first instance under Paragraph (2) below, and thus, it is acceptable to accept this case as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act
The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff succeeded to the instant place of business after the area of the instant place of business increased and the Plaintiff did not have increased the area of the place of business. Therefore, the Plaintiff did not have a duty
The Defendant dispatched a public official to the instant place of business each year to check whether the administrative law was violated, but did not point out the failure to report the change of the area of the place of business. Rather, the Defendant was granted a loan to the Plaintiff of the land, which is a military property, corresponding to the extended area of the place of business, and thus, the instant disposition is in violation of the doctrine of
With regard to the extension of the instant business site, the instant disposition is excessively harsh to the Plaintiff, and thus, the instant disposition is in violation of the principle of proportionality, in light of the following: (a) the instant disposition is rendered with respect to the extension of the instant business site; (b) the alteration of the instant business site is unable to be accepted; (c) the alteration of the instant business site to the first business reported area; and (d) such removal is de facto impossible; (d) the Plaintiff has no means to maintain livelihood in addition to the operation of the instant business site; and (e) there are neighboring business places, which have not yet been ordered to suspend business operations; and (e) the instant disposition only to the Plaintiff would
Judgment
Articles 37(4), 39(1), and 75(1)7 of the Food Sanitation Act, Article 21 subparag. 8 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 26 subparag. 4 of the same Act.