1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is operating a general restaurant in the trade name of “C” from September 17, 2015 to Daegu-gun of Fagu.

B. On May 21, 2016, the Defendant rendered a two-month disposition of business suspension against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on August 5, 2016, pursuant to Articles 75 and 44(2) of the Food Sanitation Act and Article 89 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, on the ground that the Plaintiff provided three juveniles with an amount equivalent to KRW 16,00 per week of 4 disease.

C. On September 26, 2016, the Daegu Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission filed an administrative appeal. On the other hand, on September 26, 2016, the two-month disposition of business suspension against the Plaintiff was deemed to be excessive and rendered a ruling to reduce the business suspension for one month.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5 through 7, 9, 10, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff's assertion that the non-existence of the disposition ground presented the plaintiff's identification card forged to the plaintiff before, and the plaintiff was aware of the fact that the plaintiff was an adult who was an adult but did not re-verification the identification card on the enforcement date, so the disposition of this case is unlawful. 2) The plaintiff's identification card has been verified to the juvenile during the period of deviation from and abuse of discretionary power. The controlled juvenile in this case presented a forged identification card, and there are circumstances to consider it as well as the situation where the plaintiff's living is difficult in the event of suspension of business due to the commencement of restaurant business by borrowing enormous funds. Considering the disadvantage suffered by the plaintiff due to the disposition of this case and the above circumstances, the disposition of this case is unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretion.

B. 1) Determination of the absence of grounds for disposition is based on the objective fact that administrative laws are violated in order to achieve administrative purposes.