1. The Defendant’s prohibited acts and cancellation of facilities in school environmental sanitation and cleanup zone against the Plaintiff on May 28, 2014.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a lessee of the second floor 123.17 square meters (hereinafter “instant store”) of a building with the first floor and the third floor located in Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant building”).

The above building is located within the relative Cleanup Zone among school environmental sanitation and cleanup zones under the School Health Act, located at a point of approximately 150 meters in a straight line from the boundary line of a nearby C secondary or high school, and approximately 152 meters in a straight line from the entrance.

B. On May 13, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for prohibited acts and cancellation of facilities within the school environmental sanitation and cleanup zone (hereinafter “application for cancellation of this case”).

C. On May 28, 2014, the Defendant, following deliberation by the School Environmental Sanitation and Cleanup Committee, notified the Plaintiff of the rejection of the instant application for rescission (hereinafter “instant disposition”). D.

On June 17, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the above disposition. However, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Office of Education Administrative Appeals dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on October 27 of the same year.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 6, and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant building is not directly visible from C secondary and high schools, and is not located in the main school route used by many students, and C secondary and high schools concluded that the establishment of the instant store does not interfere with learning and school health and sanitation.

Meanwhile, in the past, the Defendant had cancelled the prohibition of facilities for singing practice room, etc. in the school environmental sanitation and relative cleanup zone, and the Plaintiff invested a total of KRW 73.7 million of the construction cost in order to operate singing practice room business at the instant store.

Therefore, the defendant's application for the rescission of this case is just because the store in this case is located in the relative Cleanup Zone.