1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 25, 2018, the Plaintiff opened the “D Convenience E store” (hereinafter “instant convenience store”) which is the retail store on July 1, 2018, among the buildings of the 7th floor above the ground of Osan-si B (hereinafter “instant building”) from Osan-si Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “I”).

B. On August 13, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for designation of tobacco retailers. On August 29, 2018, the Defendant issued a notification on the non-designation of tobacco retailers (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “this case’s convenience store is inappropriate to conduct tobacco sales business as it falls under Article 16(2)2 of the Tobacco Business Act and Article 7-3 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, as it is located in the hospital site belonging to the building of the F Hospital Hospital.”

C. On November 5, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission on the instant disposition, but the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on January 21, 2019.

【Fact-finding without a dispute over the ground for recognition】 Each entry of Gap's evidence 1 through 3, 7 through 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. For the following reasons, the instant disposition should be revoked on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion was unlawful.

1) The purport of Article 16(2)2 of the Tobacco Business Act stipulating the grounds for exception to the designation of tobacco retailers is to protect the health of juveniles, and Article 7-3(1)1 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act (hereinafter “instant provision”).

(2) The instant provision is invalid beyond the bounds of delegated legislation, since the provision of the “place of business related to health and medical services, such as pharmacies, hospitals, and clinics,” is irrelevant to the purport of protecting the health of juveniles prescribed by the mother Act. 2) The instant building goes beyond the bounds of delegated legislation.