1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

A. On July 1, 2015, the Plaintiff, a pharmacist, opened a pharmacy with the trade name of the C Pharmacy in Busan Shipping Daegu (hereinafter “instant pharmacy”).

B. On January 19, 2016, Busan Metropolitan City Maritime Daegu Public Health Center received a civil petition from a civil petitioner stating that “D, without a license as a pharmacist, assisted the preparation of drugs and sold general medicine at the instant pharmacy.” On February 1, 2016, D, without a license, conducted on-site investigations at the instant pharmacy, confirmed that D, without a license as a pharmacist, prepared a prescription drug at the dispensary, and attempted to draft a confirmation document on the prescription of E and F on February 3, 2016, but the Plaintiff refused to sign.

C. On February 11, 2016, the head of the Busan Metropolitan City Maritime Daegu Public Health Center notified the Plaintiff of the prior notice of disposition and submission of opinions to the effect that the Plaintiff would be subject to one month of business suspension on the grounds of “disqualified drugs in the pharmacy” and rendered a disposition of 15 days of business suspension (from May 30, 2016 to June 13, 2016) on May 16, 2016.

Accordingly, the plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the head of the Busan Metropolitan City Maritime Affairs Commission with the Busan Metropolitan Government Maritime Affairs Commission, and the Busan Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission as of June 28, 2016.

The decision was made to revise the 15-day disposition of suspension of business as stated in the subsection 10-day disposition of suspension.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition”) May 16, 2016, changed from May 10, 201 to 10 days of suspension of business.

On April 28, 2016, Busan District Prosecutors' Office issued a disposition of suspending prosecution on the alleged violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act by the plaintiff and D.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and Eul evidence Nos. 7 through 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings is legitimate.

The main sentence of Article 13(1) of the Administrative Litigation Act shall be the defendant with the administrative agency which has rendered the disposition, etc., unless otherwise provided in other Acts.