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 operating a general restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) with the trade name “C” in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

B. On June 13, 2014, at around 19:30, the Plaintiff was admitted to the police on the ground that he provided alcoholic beverages to juveniles D in the restaurant of this case. The Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office was suspended from indictment on August 5, 2014.

C. On September 19, 2014, the Defendant: (a) mitigated 1/2 from the disposition standards (from October 15, 2014 to November 13, 2014) under the Enforcement Rule of the Food Sanitation Act on the ground that the instant restaurant provides alcoholic beverages to the Plaintiff; (b) subsequently, the Defendant issued a disposition of business suspension on February 12, 2015 following the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission’s ruling to suspend its business (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 7 evidence, Eul 5 and 6 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) D appears to be an adult, and the Plaintiff did not recognize that D was a juvenile, and the Plaintiff did not have any reason to provide alcoholic beverages to juveniles in the situation of conflict with a person operating in the same building as the restaurant of this case. Therefore, it is unreasonable for the prosecution to impose a suspension of indictment on the Plaintiff, taking into account that the Plaintiff did not know of the fact that the Plaintiff was a juvenile, but did not provide alcoholic beverages, and did not provide alcoholic beverages, and did not have any negligence.

Therefore, the instant disposition based on the suspension of indictment is unlawful.

(2) Considering the fact that it is impossible to impose not only the appearance of the D’s adult, adult, but also the obligation to verify identification cards to all people at a general restaurant in which juveniles are able to read, the Plaintiff is a juvenile.