1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. While the Plaintiff was operating a general restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) with the trade name “D” in Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (C and 1), the Plaintiff was discovered by Incheon Metropolitan City that the Plaintiff was operating the instant restaurant by expanding the area of the place of business reported to the competent authority on July 2014.

B. On August 29, 2014, the Defendant issued an order to correct the size of 551 square meters used by the Plaintiff as the place of business without filing a report, by September 22, 2014, on the ground that the Plaintiff violated Article 37 of the Food Sanitation Act, by applying Article 71 of the Food Sanitation Act and Article 89 of the Enforcement Rule of the Food Sanitation Act, on the ground that the Plaintiff violated Article 37 of the Food Sanitation Act. (hereinafter “instant corrective order”).

C. However, the Plaintiff did not comply with an order to correct the 202.4 square meters of guest seat in the instant restaurant and 36.27 square meters of a kitchen within the said period.

Accordingly, on October 20, 2014, the Defendant imposed seven days of business suspension (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff did not comply with the instant corrective order, applying Article 75 of the Food Sanitation Act and Article 89 of the Enforcement Rule of the Food Sanitation Act.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, Eul 2, 6, and 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) The Plaintiff did not arbitrarily change the area of the instant restaurant in addition to the area of the place of business reported to the competent authority and operated the instant restaurant. Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful.

(2) The Defendant imposes on the Plaintiff the charge for compelling compliance KRW 50 million under Article 30-2 of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones on the ground of unlawful alteration of use, etc.