1. The Defendant’s disposition of non-designation of tobacco retailers against the Plaintiff on September 25, 2015 is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. In order to operate convenience stores on August 28, 2015, the Plaintiff leased 102 units of the Kimhae City Building 102 (hereinafter “instant store”) from a stock company (hereinafter “instant store”).

B. On September 23, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for designation of tobacco retailers with the Defendant to engage in tobacco retail business at the instant store.

C. On September 25, 2015, Article 6 of the Enforcement Rule of the Tobacco Business Act provides for the Plaintiff as “place of business related to health and medical services, such as pharmacies, hospitals, and clinics,” and Article 7-3(1)2 of the Rules on the Criteria, etc. for Designation of Tobacco Retailer in Kimhae-si, the Defendant issued a non-designated disposition of tobacco retailers (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the instant store is a convenience facility of the D Hospital and constitutes a place of business related to health and medical services.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant store was already designated as a tobacco retailer twice or more times in the existing. The purpose of the instant store located in the 1st floor of the C building is neighborhood living facilities, each of the partitioned sections of the C building is the place where separate ownership exists, and the instant store is not a place where businesses such as pharmacies, hospitals, clinics, etc. are allowed as convenience stores. The instant store is not a place where the instant store is operated for patients using the D Hospital, but is a place where businesses such as pedestrians and drivers, etc. run in front of the instant store. According to the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, the establishment of a pharmacy is not registered in the facilities or premises of the medical institution under the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, but the Defendant is not a pharmacy establishment registration in the facilities or premises of the instant store. Accordingly, the instant store does not fall under the “place of business related to health and medical services, such as pharmacies, hospitals, clinicss, etc.” Therefore, the instant disposition made on a different premise is unlawful.