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 operates a general restaurant in the name of “C” (hereinafter “instant business”).

The area of the place of business reported with respect to the instant business establishment is 24.79 square meters.

B. However, the Plaintiff had extended the area of the place of business so that the area of the building and the land used directly and indirectly for business from around that time to that time, including the construction of a container structure warehouse on the rear side of the building in 194, to the end of 5,301.22 square meters.

C. As to the above violation of the Food Sanitation Act due to a voluntary change in the Plaintiff’s place of business, the Defendant issued a disposition of business suspension on March 22, 2005, and imposed a penalty surcharge equivalent to seven days of business suspension on six occasions between April 28, 2006 and June 13, 2014.

(B) The Defendant’s imposition of a penalty surcharge in lieu of seven days of the suspension of business on June 13, 2014 (hereinafter “the first disposition”). D.

On November 10, 2014, the Defendant: (a) applied Article 75 of the Food Sanitation Act and Article 89 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act to the period of suspension of business of the instant business establishment for seven days from December 15, 2014 to December 21, 201; (b) the period of suspension of business of the instant business establishment was the period of suspension of business from April 17, 2015 to April 17, 2015 to December 23, 2015, following the suspension of execution of the administrative appeals process to be seen below.

hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"

(c) The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission, which was dissatisfied with the instant disposition, but was dismissed on March 18, 2015. [The Plaintiff did not have any dispute over the grounds for recognition, as well as the descriptions of Gap’s 1 through 4, Gap’s 10, Eul’s 1 through 5, and Eul’s 1 through 5, and the purport of the pleading

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion constitutes a violation after the first disposition.