1. The Defendant’s revocation of registration of construction business that the Plaintiff rendered on September 6, 2012 shall be revoked.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 5, 2007, the Plaintiff was a company running a construction business, and registered with the Defendant as a “construction business” among the types of businesses performing general construction works pursuant to Article 9(1) of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry.

B. On May 17, 2010, the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to suspend its business from June 1, 2010 to August 31, 2010, pursuant to Article 83 subparag. 3 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, on the ground that the Plaintiff failed to meet the standards for the registration of capital under the Framework Act on the Construction Industry.

(The above disposition shall contain the type of business in which the business is suspended and its registration number).

On June 21, 2010 during the period of the said suspension, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the remodeling of a kindergarten in the name of an elementary school (from June 29, 2010 to July 15, 2010; 12,751,940 won in the construction cost; hereinafter “instant construction”) and commenced the said construction work on June 29, 2010.

On September 6, 2012, the Defendant issued a disposition to cancel the registration of construction business to the Plaintiff under Article 83 subparagraph 8 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry on the ground that the Plaintiff operated business during the period of business suspension.

(A) Evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter “instant disposition”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry of Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion is as follows.

The instant construction project constitutes a “minor construction project” that can be performed without registration of construction business under the proviso of Article 9(1) of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry and Article 8(1)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry (amended by Presidential Decree No. 24155, Oct. 29, 2012), and thus, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff violated the disposition of business suspension on the ground that the Plaintiff engaged in the instant construction project during the period of business suspension. Thus, the instant disposition

B. In light of the fact that the employee of the Plaintiff made it difficult to make a living due to the instant disposition, the instant disposition is taken.