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 a petroleum retailer as prescribed by the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (hereinafter “petroleum Business Act”) that operates the “C gas station” in the Pulsung City B.

B. On February 13, 2015, the Korea Petroleum Quality & Distribution Authority: (a) collected one-lane sample from the foregoing gas station and conducted quality inspections; (b) confirmed that other petroleum products, such as one sample sample, were mixed with about 85% fake petroleum products; (c) on February 27, 2015, the quality inspection was conducted on a two-lane sample and verified that four samples were mixed with about 5% of other petroleum products, such as oil for automobile transit.

C. On April 22, 2015, according to the result of quality inspections twice the above two times, the Defendant: (a) applied Article 13(3)8, (1)12, and Article 14(1) of the Petroleum Business Act; and (b) Article 17(1) [Attachment 2] of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act of the Petroleum Business Act on the ground that the Plaintiff violated Article 29(1)1 of the Petroleum Business Act by manufacturing and storing fake petroleum products under Article 2(10) of the Petroleum Business Act with respect to the Plaintiff; and (c) repeatedly committed the same offense during the period in which the procedures for taking an administrative disposition against the offense are in progress, the Defendant issued a disposition of 1/2 increased by 1/2 during three months during which the administrative disposition is suspended (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

On September 16, 2015, the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission, upon filing an administrative appeal, found it clear that the Plaintiff violated Article 29 of the Petroleum Business Act on September 16, 2015, and deemed that it was difficult to deem that the Plaintiff was taking an administrative measure on the result of the primary sample inspection, and rendered a ruling to reduce the instant disposition by three months of the suspension of business.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 and 14, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. On February 13, 2015, an employee of the Plaintiff’s assertion changed oil into the Home Ri-ro vehicle.