The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

judgment of the first instance.

The reason why our court's explanation about this case is the same as that of the part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Plaintiff asserts that, upon the order of alcoholic beverages on the same day, they were adults of the age between 25 and 28, and that there was no intention to sell alcoholic beverages to them. However, sanctions imposed on violation of administrative laws and regulations are based on the objective fact of violation of administrative laws and regulations in order to achieve administrative purposes, and thus, in principle, there is no intention or negligence on the offender (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 79Nu251, May 13, 1980). Thus, the above argument is without merit. Further, the Plaintiff did not set the level of sanctions on the premise that the disposition in this case is "suspect" of violation of administrative laws and regulations, and the criteria for administrative dispositions (related to Article 89) are not different from the intention and negligence of members of the family, and thus, the Plaintiff's assertion that "the Plaintiff's disposition in this case may not be affected by the Plaintiff's act of abuse of discretionary authority," and the Plaintiff's assertion that "the Plaintiff's act of abuse of discretionary authority is without merit."