1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is to dismiss or delete the following among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justifiable even if the evidence submitted by the plaintiffs to this court is added, and it is also identical with the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance except for addition to the determination that there is no error

Therefore, it shall be quoted by Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

4. The 15th page "Plaintiff" shall be changed to "Plaintiffs".

The 6th 6th 2nd 6th am the “court” shall be regarded as the “Incheon District Court.”

7. The plaintiffs' assertion is deleted from 7.3 degrees of "A. plaintiffs' assertion".

Each "80%" of the 7th parallel 4th parallel 8th parallel 17th parallel 17th parallel shall be "80%".

7. The "instant disposition" in the 7th parallel shall be deemed to be "each disposition of this case".

7. Each "less than 80%" shall be raised to "less than 80%" of 7.15 and 17.

8 pages 8, "Judgment, etc." are referred to as "see judgment, etc.".

10 pages 10, “In the event that no advance payment has been made to the AJ, most of the payments are made in cash,” and “in the absence of an advance payment made to the AJ.”

Pursuant to the following subparagraphs, 10 pages 20,00 21:

It cannot be deemed as a deviation or abuse of discretionary authority. Furthermore, the Defendant may be deemed to have taken each of the dispositions of this case against the Plaintiffs following the investigation results and additional investigation procedures in accordance with the guidance guidelines, such as the guidelines for the disposition of improper training by business owners. Therefore, each of the dispositions of this case cannot be deemed to have violated guidance, such as the guidelines for the disposition of improper training by business owners. Therefore, this part of the Plaintiffs’ assertion is without merit.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims except for the part of the plaintiffs' claims seeking the revocation of the defendant's respective restrictions on financing, are dismissed in entirety as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion.