1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is running a singing practice room business with the trade name “C” in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

Between 00:40 on December 31, 2014 and 01:10 on December 31, 2014, the Plaintiff’s wife arranged one contact loan to E, a customer, who had been engaged in singing business on behalf of the Plaintiff.

B. On March 13, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition of two months of business suspension (from April 21, 2015 to June 19, 2015) against the Plaintiff on the ground of the loan arrangement (the second violation).

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

On April 23, 2014, the plaintiff has a record of business suspension from the defendant as a violation of the same kind of act (a adjacent loan brokerage).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1-3, Eul evidence Nos. 1-4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

가. 원고 주장 술에 취한 손님이 윽박지르면서 도우미를 불러달라고 하여 위와 같이 접대부를 알선하게 되었고, 노래방 영업이 잘 안 되는 힘든 상황에서 영업정지 2월은 영업을 그만하라는 것과 같으므로, 이 사건 처분은 너무 가혹하여 취소되어야 한다.

B. Determination: ① The mere fact that there was a strong request from customers cannot be deemed to have been inevitable to arrange for a loan; ② The business suspension period is in accordance with the disposition standards set forth in Article 22(1)4, Article 27(1)5, and Article 27(3) of the Music Industry Promotion Act; Article 15(1) and attached Table 2(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act; the above disposition standards per se do not conform with the Constitution or laws; or there is no reasonable ground to recognize that the disposition in this case in accordance with the above disposition standards is considerably unfair in light of the content of the violation as the ground for the disposition in question and the contents and purport of the relevant statutes; ③ there is a need to strictly enforce the law even in order to prevent the frequent occurrence of the same violation and maintain fairness. In light of the above, the above disposition in this case also takes into account all the circumstances of the Plaintiff.