1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff has been engaged in singran business with the trade name of “C” (hereinafter “instant business”).

On November 13, 2015, at around 22:44, the Plaintiff entered the instant business establishment with D married couple and E, and entered F, G and H as their children.

On January 25, 2016, the Plaintiff received a summary order of KRW 300,000,000, which became final and conclusive as it is, due to the fact that the Plaintiff had three juveniles, F, etc. to the instant business establishment, which is prohibited from having access.

On April 15, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition of business suspension for one month (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Article 75(1) of the Food Sanitation Act and Article 89 [Attachment Table 23] of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff, as seen above, had access to the instant business establishment, which is prohibited from access by juveniles, violated Article 44(2)2 of the Food Sanitation Act.

[Reasons for Recognition] Entry Nos. 1, 2, and 3 of Eul and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was unlawful since, in the case of the instant establishment that is an entertainment bar business, a juvenile was admitted to the rest of the instant establishment that did not know that his access was not allowed even if the juvenile was accompanied by a person with parental authority. Therefore, the instant disposition that did not consider such circumstances is unlawful.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. According to Article 29(2) and (4) of the Juvenile Protection Act and Article 27(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, a proprietor or employee of an entertainment bar business and an entertainment bar business shall be prohibited from having access to a business establishment even if a juvenile is accompanied by a person with parental authority.

Even if juveniles, such as F, etc., were accompanied by their parents while running the instant entertainment business, the Plaintiff breached the duty of prohibiting them from having access to the instant business, thereby violating this duty.