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 June 23, 2002, the Plaintiff, a corporation established for the purpose of selling petroleum, opened and operated a gas station (hereinafter “instant gas station”) under the trade name, “Cukjin Jin-gu Oil station” in the 703-1, Yangsan-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Yangsan-si.

B. On March 30, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) on the instant gas station, using the Category A 3, a vehicle for the mobile sale of petroleum products owned by himself/herself (hereinafter “instant Home Ri”); (b) 106 liters in the Category B digging season using a vehicle for the instant oil tank (hereinafter “the instant Home Ri”); (c) while an employee of the Yong-Nam headquarters in Yong-Nam headquarters collected samples from the instant Home Ri, etc., and conducted quality inspection (hereinafter “quality inspection in this case”); and (d) the result is as follows.

As a result of the examination of the type of sample sampling facilities, 1.0% mixed petroleum of 30% fuel, such as 1.0% of fake petroleum 4 B, e.g., e., e., e., e., e., tank 1 instant Home Ri No. 3 of the instant Home Ri No. 3 of the instant Home Ri No. 3 of the instant Home No. 3 of the Home No. 3 of the instant Home No. 1 of the instant case, and 25% of fake petroleum, such as e.g., e.,

C. On April 18, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the result of the instant quality inspection, but the result of the examination that took effect on May 8, 2017 was also the same as the result of the instant quality inspection.

On July 10, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition imposing penalty surcharge of KRW 100 million on the ground that the Plaintiff violated Article 29(1)1 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (hereinafter “The Petroleum Business Act”) by handling fake petroleum products (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3 through 5, 8, Eul evidence 2 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In the quality inspection of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1, the petroleum products contained in the instant Home Ri Nos. 1 and 3 are all the same.