1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff is operating a general restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) in the name of “C” in Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.

On September 15, 2014, at around 23:30 on September 23, 2014, the Plaintiff was discovered by the police without confirming the age of three juveniles, D, etc., and provided a total of KRW 57,500 for three soldiers, two soldiers, etc. in the instant restaurant.

On November 12, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition to suspend the business of the instant restaurant for 45 days (from November 26, 2014 to January 9, 2015) on the ground that the Plaintiff offered alcoholic beverages to juveniles (the second violation) (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

In response, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal on November 21, 2014, but the Incheon Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed it on December 22, 2014. Accordingly, the Defendant again suspended the restaurant business from January 16, 2015 to March 1, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 5, 15, 16, Eul 1 through 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) At the time of the non-existence of the grounds for disposition, the Plaintiff did not provide alcoholic beverages to three juveniles. They made a false statement that they dice in the instant restaurant even though they had diceed a parent’s purchase at their friendship house. 2) The Plaintiff borrowed money as security for the Plaintiff’s real estate for a fraudulent act that became a bad credit holder due to the Plaintiff’s failure in the business, and prepared the instant restaurant. At the time, the Plaintiff’s fraud was in the restaurant room, and the Plaintiff was found in the restaurant room, and was found to have been found to have been exposed to the control of the instant case. In light of the above, the instant disposition was considerably more unfavorable than the public interest to be achieved by the disposition, and thus, it was unlawful by abusing discretionary power.

(b)as shown in the attached text of the relevant statute;