1. The Defendant’s revocation of ex officio revocation of tobacco retailers against the Plaintiff on December 18, 2018.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 11, 2016, the Plaintiff was designated by the Defendant as a tobacco retailer whose place of business in Gwangju Seo-gu (hereinafter “instant place of business”).

B. On October 1, 2018, the Plaintiff terminated the franchise agreement that the Plaintiff entered into with D (hereinafter “D”) and E on the instant place of business as of October 1, 2018, and closed the franchise agreement that the Plaintiff entered into with D with D on the instant place of business, and the Plaintiff entered into an agreement to transfer the inventory goods located in the store to E, and E was registered as the location of the instant place of business on the same day.

C. On October 2, 2018, the Plaintiff reported and accepted the suspension of tobacco retail business to the Defendant from October 2, 2018 to November 1, 2018. On November 1, 2018, the Plaintiff again reported and accepted the suspension of tobacco retail business on November 2, 2018 to December 1, 2018.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant report of suspension of business”). (d)

On October 28, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for change of the location of a tobacco retailer’s place of business to the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju. However, on November 30, 2018, the Defendant rejected the said application on the ground that the Plaintiff lost the physical requirements of the existing place of business.

E. On December 18, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition of ex officio revocation of tobacco retailers pursuant to Article 16(1) of the Tobacco Business Act and Article 7(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the actual user of the instant place of business was changed and the requirements for designation of tobacco retailers were extinguished.

F. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Gwangju Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on March 29, 2019.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s instant disposition should be revoked on the following grounds.