1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is to change the “business politics disposition” to “business suspension disposition” to “business suspension disposition” to the second 11th th 1st of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the third 8th “right to discretion” to “right to discretion,” and 2. D. of the judgment as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment, except for the following modifications, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The part to be mard;

D. (1) The subject matter of administrative sanctions and sanctions against the violation of the standard administrative laws and regulations for the imposition of administrative sanctions are sanctions against the objective facts of violation of the administrative laws and regulations in order to achieve administrative purposes. Thus, not a real offender, but a person prescribed as a person in charge under the laws and regulations, and barring any special circumstance, they may be imposed without intention or negligence on the violator, barring special circumstances.

(2) In light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the lower court’s determination as to whether a disciplinary administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms ought to be made by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to such disposition, by objectively examining the content of the relevant act of violation as the ground for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant act of disposal, and all the relevant circumstances, etc.

In this case, even if the criteria for disciplinary administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ministerial Ordinance, it is nothing more than that prescribed in the administrative affairs rules inside the administrative agency, and thus, it is not effective externally to guarantee citizens or courts. Whether such disposition is legitimate or not must be determined in accordance with the contents and purport of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, not only the above disposition criteria,

The disposition can not be regarded as legitimate immediately.

except that.