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 C control point in Sipoposi B (hereinafter “instant business”).

B. On August 26, 2013, the chief of the Military Police Station sold Kapacquequerels and cansdis to D, which the Plaintiff sold to D, around March 14, 2013, as a result of internal investigation with the Plaintiff on August 26, 2013, around three copies at the instant business establishment. Of the cansdis, one copy marked as December 31, 2012 (hereinafter “instant cansdis”) was included and notified to the Defendant.

C. On August 1, 2013, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition of suspending business on the ground that the Plaintiff sold the candys of this case for which the distribution period expired.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul Nos. 1 and 4, the purport of all pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion period of distribution up to December 31, 2012 was the same kind of product that was put in and sold at the store of this case on May 29, 2012, and the same kind of product that was put in thereafter was the same kind of product until December 31, 2013, which was the distribution period of which was up to December 31, 2013. Around February 23, 2013, the distribution period of which was up to December 31, 2013, the Plaintiff failed to present the original product at the time of this paragraph, and presented the damaged product without packing materials. In light of the fact that D’s products were sold at the Plaintiff’s store of this case, there was no objective evidence of violation of the Food Sanitation Act, and in light of D’s excessive demand for compensation and methods, it is presumed that the Defendant’s demand for return and back sale of the product of this case was unlawful.

(b) annex relevant laws and regulations;