1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is running a general restaurant business in the name of “C” in Busan Northern-gu B (hereinafter “instant business”).

B. On December 6, 2015, the police officer belonging to the Busan Northern Police Station discovered that the Plaintiff’s employee D provided alcoholic beverages to juveniles at the instant establishment on December 6, 2015, and the head of the Busan Northern Police Station notified the Defendant of the above fact on December 7, 2015.

C. On January 14, 2016, the Defendant: (a) applied Articles 44(2) and 75 of the Food Sanitation Act; and (b) Article 89 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act to the Plaintiff on the ground of the foregoing violations; (c) imposed two months of business suspension (hereinafter “the first disposition”).

The plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the original disposition with the Busan Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission, and on February 23, 2016, the Busan Metropolitan Administrative Appeals Commission made an adjudication that changed the original disposition against the plaintiff to the disposition of business suspension 40 days.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition” that was reduced on January 14, 2016 by an administrative appeal ruling to suspend business operations for a period of 40 days (hereinafter referred to as “the instant disposition”). [The grounds for recognition] of absence of dispute, entry in Gap’s 1, 2, Eul’s 1 through 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant business establishment operated the instant business establishment had no record of punishing juveniles for selling alcoholic beverages; (b) the Plaintiff had thoroughly trained employees who are not allowed to provide alcoholic beverages to juveniles; (c) the instant business establishment causes enormous business losses and inconvenience to their livelihood when the instant disposition is executed as the Plaintiff’s means of living; and (d) the details of the instant violation, etc., the instant disposition was deemed to be unlawful since it abused the Plaintiff’s discretion and abused it.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

(c) the decision-making administrative disposition has deviates from the scope of discretion under social norms.