1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff’s contract for the entrusted operation management of the hotel 1) C Co., Ltd. operating real estate trust business (hereinafter “C”).

(D) On December 30, 2014, the Company D (hereinafter “D”) conducting real estate development business, etc.

B) As between D and B, D is the petitioner E-gu, Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si (hereinafter “instant land”).

(2) The hotel of this case (hereinafter referred to as the “instant hotel”) in trust and on the above land.

(2) As a result, C newly constructed the instant hotel on the instant land from March 2015 and obtained the approval for use on September 8, 2017.

3) On or around December 2017, the Plaintiff entered into an entrusted operation management agreement with 125 sectional owners who purchased 169 guest rooms among the total number of 392 guest rooms (4-31 floors) of the instant hotel, under which the Plaintiff is entrusted with the management of all the pertinent guest rooms, common areas, and rights attached thereto from the above sectional owners, and the Plaintiff is entrusted with the management of the said guest rooms, common areas, and all of the above rights, and the said sectional owners shall pay monthly interest on the secured loan (where the purchase price was borrowed) or final profit (where the purchase price was paid in full) (hereinafter “instant entrusted operation agreement”).

B) On January 24, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a business report for accommodation business (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s business report”) with the following contents, and the Defendant accepted it on the same day.

Article 11(3)1 of the Public Health Control Act and Article 11(3)1 of the same Act on the ground that “A petition-gu, Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si, 4-31, 4-31, 4-31, and 0-0 guest accommodation (general): The number of guest rooms: 392, Han-si, 02, and 02, the Defendant continuously suspended the Plaintiff on November 18, 2019, on the ground that “the Plaintiff continued to suspend the business for at least six months without good cause.”