The validity of the revocation of business license for the reasons of business conducted before the court's stay of execution.

As long as a business has been conducted before a court decides to suspend the execution even after the business has been suspended, even if the court made a decision to suspend the execution and the disposition has been revoked on the grounds of illegality in the principal lawsuit, the disposition to revoke the business license for the reason that the business was conducted during the business suspension period is not a disposition with defects in the invalidation of the validity.

Articles 2 [General Administrative Disposition] and 19 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Supreme Court Decision 84Nu286 delivered on September 25, 1984 (Gong1984, 1745) Supreme Court Decision 90Nu5580 Delivered on November 27, 1990 (Gong1991, 249) Supreme Court Decision 93Nu11432 Delivered on December 7, 1993 (Gong194, 369)

Plaintiff (Attorney Park Jong-ho, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Head of the Geum-gu Busan Metropolitan Government

Busan High Court Decision 93Gu7693 delivered on May 25, 1995

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, after compiling the evidence presented in its judgment, the plaintiff obtained a business license from the defendant on September 20, 1992, and was discovered as a result of the sale of alcohol and alcohol to two minors on May 11, 1993, and received a business suspension order for one month from the defendant on June 12, 1993. On June 24, 1993, the plaintiff was discovered as a result of continuing operation on June 24, 1993, and was released from the defendant on September 2, 1993. The plaintiff received a business suspension order (the disposition in this case) on July 5, 1993 on the ground of the business suspension, and the plaintiff was not subject to a business suspension order on May 4, 1994, and the court's rejection of the above business suspension order on the ground that the disposition in this case was invalid before the court's revocation of the above business suspension order on the ground that the disposition in this case became invalid.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff who is the appellant. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)