1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 15, 2018, Plaintiff A succeeded to the status of the petroleum retailer of the above gas station from D who operated the gas station in Ischeon-si C. From January 18, 2018, Plaintiff A started to operate the gas station with the trade name “E gas station” (hereinafter “instant gas station”).

B. On March 26, 2018, employees of the Institute collected samples of gasoline for automobiles and diesel for automobiles (hereinafter “instant diesel”), and conducted the quality inspection of the samples. On August 1, 2018, the head of the Seoul Metropolitan Area Southern Headquarters notified the Defendant of the quality inspection result that “The instant diesel is a fake petroleum product pursuant to Article 2 subparag. 10 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (hereinafter “petroleum Business Act”) is a product containing approximately 15 volume of other petroleum products (e.g., oil oil, etc.) on the instant diesel.”

C. On August 24, 2018, on the ground that Plaintiff A violated Article 29 of the Petroleum Business Act, the Defendant issued a disposition suspending the Plaintiff A’s business for three months (from August 31, 2018 to November 30, 2018) (hereinafter “instant disposition”). D.

Plaintiff

B succeeded to the status of the petroleum retailer of the instant gas station from the Plaintiff on August 27, 2018.

E. On August 27, 2018, Plaintiff A filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the first disposition with the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission (hereinafter “instant administrative appeal”), and applied for suspension of the execution of the first disposition.

F. On August 29, 2018, the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a decision to suspend the validity of the first disposition until the administrative appeal in this case is concluded, and on November 5, 2018, rendered a ruling to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim for administrative appeal.

G. On November 20, 2018, the Defendant: (a) rendered a disposition suspending Plaintiff B on November 20, 2018 on the ground that the Plaintiff’s violation of Article 8 of the Petroleum Business Act was succeeded to Plaintiff B pursuant to Article 8 of the Petroleum Business Act; (b) for three months (from December 3, 2018 to March 2, 2019).