1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a public health business entity operating “C”, a lodging establishment located in Daegu Dong-gu, Daegu-gu, (hereinafter “the instant telecom”). D is the Plaintiff’s wife.

B. On August 24, 2015, the Defendant was notified of the violation of the Act on the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts, Etc. with the purport that “D has arranged sexual traffic around July 22, 2015,” which was run by the Plaintiff from the head of the Daegu East Police Station.

C. Accordingly, on October 16, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition of ordering the suspension of business for three months pursuant to the main sentence of Article 11(1) of the Public Health Control Act and Article 19 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Public Health Control Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 362, Nov. 3, 2015) on the ground that the Plaintiff, who is a business operator of the instant cartel (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion of mistake of facts is unreasonable to hold the Plaintiff liable for the instant violation since the Plaintiff did not instruct or neglect the arrangement of commercial sex acts against D, which is not related to the Plaintiff. 2) The control of the instant violation by the police officer’s act of violation is illegal by the police officer’s act of naval investigation.

In light of various circumstances, including the fact that the instant violation was not caused under the direction or recognition of the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff is living in the course of operating the instant cartel, and the Plaintiff suffers from irrecoverable economic loss when the disposition of suspension of business is executed, the instant disposition is unlawful as it excessively harsh to the Plaintiff, and thus, constitutes an abuse of discretionary power.