1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 1, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of the establishment of a pharmacy with the name of the C pharmacy (hereinafter “instant pharmacy”) in the area of 403m2 of the building B (hereinafter “instant building”). The Defendant received the application for registration on the same day after reviewing the relevant statutes.

B. D, which operated a pharmacy on the first floor of the instant building, filed a civil petition with the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission on the ground that the establishment of the instant pharmacy violated relevant statutes. On July 1, 2016, the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission expressed its opinion to the Defendant that the establishment of the instant pharmacy was unlawful on the ground that, even though the Korea-Japan sales store located on the side of the instant pharmacy was a disguised business to avoid the exclusive passage requirement stipulated under Article 20(5) Subparag. 4 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, most of the corridor users of the instant building are medical institutions and pharmacy users.

C. Accordingly, on September 9, 2016, the Defendant revoked the registration of the establishment of the instant pharmacy pursuant to Article 76 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act and Article 50 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act on the ground that the registration of the establishment of the instant pharmacy was in violation of Article 20(5) of the same Act.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 19, Eul evidence No. 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) There is no exclusive passage between the instant pharmacy and the instant medical institution under Article 20(5)4 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act. (2) Article 76(1)2 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, which served as the basis of the instant disposition, is applicable only to the case where: (a) the establishment of a pharmacy was registered without knowledge of the grounds under each subparagraph of Article 20(5) of the same Act at the time of the registration of establishment of a pharmacy in light of the legislative intent and language thereof; and (b) the latter is proved to have such grounds later; (c) the same factual basis as the instant case is established.