logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.04.11 2018구합1782
영업정지처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From November 30, 2017, the Plaintiff is registered as a business operator of a singing practice room (hereinafter “instant singing practice room”) with the trade name of “D” as “D” (hereinafter “instant singing practice room”).

B. On July 11, 2018, the Defendant issued 40 days of business suspension pursuant to Articles 22(1)3 and 22(1)4 of the Music Industry Promotion Act (hereinafter “ Music Industry Act”) and attached Table 2 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the sales and provision of alcoholic beverages and the arrangement of employment for entertainment was conducted in the instant singing practice room.”

hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"

(i) [The facts without dispute over the basis for recognition, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) acknowledged that, on December 27, 2017, E, the actual business owner of the instant singing practice room, sold alcoholic beverages in the instant singing practice room. However, not only provided a service loan arrangement, but also, E had been playing in the said place. Therefore, the instant disposition based on the ground of disposition is unlawful. (2) The Plaintiff did not engage in the same act as the instant case before the date of the instant disposition; (3) the Plaintiff’s maintenance of livelihood became difficult due to the suspension of business; and (4) E had already been subject to criminal punishment against the said act, the instant disposition was unlawful and abused the Plaintiff’s discretion by excessively harshing the Plaintiff.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. In a civil or administrative trial as to whether there was an arrangement of a single loan, even if it is not bound by the fact-finding in a criminal trial, the fact that a criminal judgment already became final and conclusive on the same factual basis is a flexible evidence, and thus, it is another evidence submitted in a civil or administrative trial.

arrow