The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. On May 16, 2012, the Defendant, while operating the E hotel in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, posted a notice of administrative disposition of suspension of business by the Gangnam-gu Office on June 14, 2012, while the Defendant posted the notice of administrative disposition of suspension of business. On June 14, 2012, the Defendant posted the notice as a standing signboard at around 01:0, and on June 23, 2012, the Defendant continued to operate the said notice as a tree around 16:40.

Accordingly, the defendant has harmed the utility of the seals or seizures and other administrative dispositions that public officials performed in relation to their duties by other means.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined, the order for suspension of business was issued pursuant to Article 11 of the Public Health Control Act, and the notice stating the contents of the order for suspension of business was attached to the hotel, etc., although it is recognized that the notice stating the contents of the order for suspension of business was attached to the hotel, it does not take effect upon notification of the administrative disposition to the other party, and it does not take effect upon attaching the notice; ② there is no ground to require the notice to be attached to the Public Health Control Act; ③ The notice of this case is merely notification to the visitors to the hotel of this case, and ③ there is an administrative disposition, and there is no evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

3. In conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of facts constituting the crime, the judgment of innocence is rendered under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment is publicly announced under Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act, and it