1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. For the purpose of “joint check-up and sample collection of government-funded organic fertilizers in 2014,” public officials belonging to the Sungsung-gun and Mosing-gun visited the Plaintiff’s workplace and collected samples from some of the products produced by the Plaintiff on March 15, 2014 (hereinafter “instant samples”).

B. The Rural Development Administration requested the Agricultural Technology Commercialization Foundation to inspect fertilizers collected for the purpose of quality inspection. On June 17, 2014, upon receiving notification of the results of the inspection, notified the head of the local government to which the company belongs, who was judged inappropriate as a result of the inspection, and requested an administrative disposition accordingly.

C. On June 18, 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the result of the quality inspection conducted by the Rural Development Administration of the instant samples that the content of the instant samples falls short of 8.77% of the certified component quantity under Article 14(1) of the Fertilizer Control Act, and the Plaintiff requested re-inspection on June 27, 2014.

On July 21, 2014, the Rural Development Administration reported the content of the sample of this case to 27.18%.

Accordingly, the defendant notified the plaintiff of the result of the re-inspection on July 23, 2014, and on the ground that the sample of this case is 27.18% of the content of the organic substance and falls short of 9.40% of the standard of the guaranteed component quantity, the defendant is subject to Article 14(1) of the Fertilizer Control Act and Article 16(2) [Attachment 2] of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, and the disposition of this case is "the disposition

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 3 (provisional number) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The legality of the instant disposition

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion frequently collected samples and requested a corporation B to analyze the composition of samples. The content of organic substances, such as the result of the first and second tests of this case, from December 2012 to June 2014, is 30%.