beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
Details of the disposition
The Plaintiff is a person who operates a mutual general restaurant (hereinafter referred to as “instant restaurant”) with the trade name “C” in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.
around 00:00 on November 16, 2018, police officers belonging to the Seoul Gangseo-gu Police Station discovered that the Plaintiff sold 1 residues 500C C 2,2700c c 1 residues to two juveniles including juveniles D (the age of 18) in the restaurant of this case.
(hereinafter “instant violation”). On November 23, 2018, the Plaintiff responded to the Seoul Gangnam Police Station as follows.
At around 23:50 on November 15, 2018, 5 male men were placed in 23:50, and 2:00 drinking and drinking water were placed in 2:00 and later, 2,700c. However, the police officer received a report that 20 minutes had sold alcoholic beverages to juveniles, and 3 of 5,000 juveniles were examined. However, 2 of 5,000 juveniles were adults, and 2 of them were identified as juveniles on the same day, but the 2 of them did not examine their identification cards on the same day, and the 2 of them did not inspect their identification cards on the day when they were identified as adults, and did not inspect their identification cards on the day when they did not inspect their identification cards on the day when they were identified as adults, and the 2 of this case did not inspect their identification cards on the day when they were inspected on the day of their business suspension.
The plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission, and on April 8, 2019, the said administrative appeals commission rendered a ruling that "the disposition of the business suspension in two months shall be changed to one month and ten days of business suspension."
On May 29, 2019, the defendant reflected the ruling of the said administrative appeals commission with respect to the plaintiff on May 29, 2019 and made two months of business suspension.