1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From May 6, 201, the Plaintiff was subject to a disposition of two months of the suspension of business on the ground that he/she employed a entertainment receptionist by employing a entertainment receptionist on February 12, 2014, while running a entertainment bar (hereinafter “instant business”) under the trade name “C” in the Seo-gu Busan City from May 6, 201, and received a ruling to reduce it as one month of the suspension of business.

B. On August 21, 2014, around 22:30, the Plaintiff, at the instant establishment, hired two entertainment receptioners at the same time, and had them follow the alcohols on the side of the customers, was exposed to police officers belonging to the Busan Coast Guard D Zone.

C. Accordingly, on September 1, 2014, the head of Busan City Police Station informed the Defendant of the instant business establishment as a statutory-violation business establishment. On September 25, 2014, the Defendant issued an administrative disposition for the suspension of business operations for the Plaintiff on September 25, 2014, following the procedure for prior notice of disposition against the Plaintiff.

On the other hand, the plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the above disposition with the Busan Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission, and the Busan Metropolitan Administrative Appeals Commission changed the disposition of business suspension for two months on November 19, 2014 to the disposition of business suspension for one month (hereinafter referred to as "the disposition of this case") on September 25, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant disposition was unlawful since the Plaintiff did not have any reason for disposition by employing entertainment workers at the instant business establishment, which led to the Plaintiff’s livelihood by operating the instant business establishment, such as deviation from discretion and abuse of the Plaintiff’s husband, and the Plaintiff’s husband were in the absence of position, and thus, the instant disposition may be executed.