1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiffs are operating a general restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) with the trade name “E store” in Jeju-si.

B. Around 21:00 on October 30, 2017, F, an employee of the instant restaurant, provided the instant restaurant for the purpose of selling to juveniles G (199) 4 soldiers, who are harmful substances to juveniles, without confirming their age, such as verifying their identification cards, etc. In addition, the instant restaurant provided for the purpose of selling juveniles G (199), and the said fact was charged as a violation of the Juvenile Protection Act on the ground that it was suspected that it was committed, and thereafter, suspended prosecution at the Jeju District Prosecutors’ Office on November 29, 2017.

C. The Defendant, based on Articles 75 and 82 of the Food Sanitation Act, Article 53 [Attachment 1] of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 89 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, imposed a penalty surcharge of KRW 35,40,00 in lieu of the business suspension 30 days on the Plaintiffs, on the grounds that the Plaintiffs provided alcoholic beverages to juveniles and violated Article 44(2) of the Food Sanitation Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”), imposed a disposition of imposition (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (if there are additional numbers, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. All of the plaintiffs' arguments that juvenile G et al. were adults, and it was found that F who did not have much employees' work experience provided alcohol without being aware of the fact that it was included by juveniles, and that it was found in the restaurant of this case to be a sale of alcoholic beverages to juveniles, which is first the first time, and the plaintiffs received thorough education for ordinary employees, and that F made a thorough disposition of suspension of indictment due to the fact that F made a confession, rebuttal, and future inspection of identification card thoroughly, the disposition of this case was abused by excessively harsh discretion.