The validity of an order to close a part of the place of business solely on the ground that a part of the place of business violates the order and the revocation of the business license.

Even if a building is included in the 12th square meters of a building which is a place for which permission for multi-level business was granted, the order to close the facility repair pursuant to Article 25 of the Food Sanitation Act cannot be issued on the ground that the building does not have sufficient capacity to build the building, separate from the order to close the facility repair pursuant to Article 25 of the Food Sanitation Act. Thus, the order to close the 7th square meters of the building is unlawful and the disposition to revoke the business license on the ground that the building violated

Article 25 of the Food Sanitation Act, Article 24 of the Enforcement Rule of the Food Sanitation Act, Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1

The head of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

Seoul High Court Decision 82Gu514 delivered on March 2, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

According to the facts duly established by the court below, the above part of the building's 2nd floor and 14th floor is marked on the house ledger and the 2nd floor of the building, but actually constructed before 1957, the 12th floor and the 24th floor of the building were all constructed. The plaintiff was engaged in multi-business from 12th floor to 24th floor of the above 24th floor to 1981.12.31, 1981, which included the above 2nd floor's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's non-business permission's.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice)