1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of disposition;

A. From March 2014, the Plaintiff operated a general restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) with the trade name “D” located in the net city C and the second floor in B from March 2014, the Plaintiff changed the name of the business operator on July 9, 2015 according to the Defendant’s corrective order.

B. On March 27, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition of business suspension for one month by applying Article 75 of the Food Sanitation Act and Article 89 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act to the Plaintiff, on the ground that “the Plaintiff installed a sound and reflect facility in the instant business from March 2014 to April 13, 2015 and operated the business.”

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal, and the Jeonnam-do Administrative Appeals Commission ruled that the said disposition is mitigated to 15 days of business suspension.

(hereinafter, the disposition of business suspension for 15 days remaining after mitigation of the disposition on March 27, 2016 (hereinafter “instant disposition”). 【The fact that there is no dispute as a ground for recognition, the entries in the evidence Nos. 20 through 23, and the purport of the whole pleadings.”

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) In light of the following: (a) under the circumstances where the sales of the Plaintiff’s grounds for disposition fall short of the non-existence of the grounds for disposition, and where the business is not carried out, only one time for the purpose of stick-out by installing a reflect cycle excluding microphones and amplf facilities for the purpose of shooting; (b) the instant disposition based on a different premise is unlawful even though it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff was engaged in business by installing sound and amplf facilities; (c) the Plaintiff’s business is being carried on upon the determination of class 3 of disability for asserting the deviation and abuse of discretion; (d) the civil petitioner who interfered with the Plaintiff’s business caused this case by malicious falsity; and (e) the suspension of business becomes a business, economic difficulty due to overdue wages and taxes of employees, the instant disposition is too harsh and unreasonable.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. Determination 1: (a) Nos. 1, 2, and 1.