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 person who operates a singing practice room with the trade name, “C singing practice room” (hereinafter “instant business”).

B. On July 7, 2014, the Defendant issued a prior notification to the Plaintiff, and on July 15, 2014, the Plaintiff or the Plaintiff’s denial submitted an opinion to the Defendant that “the vessel was exposed to the control by the radio waves.”

C. On July 15, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition of business suspension for 40 days (the period of business suspension: from August 11, 2014 to September 19, 2014; hereinafter “instant disposition”) by applying Article 22(1) of the Music Industry Promotion Act (hereinafter “ Music Industry Promotion Act”) to the Plaintiff, on April 22, 2014, on the ground that the Plaintiff arranged for a entertainment loan to customers and sold alcoholic beverages, after determining the period of business suspension for 30 days in relation to an entertainment loan brokerage as 10 days in relation to an entertainment business suspension, and the period of each violation as 10 days in relation to an alcoholic beverage sales.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, 5, Eul evidence 1 to 3 (including each number), the whole purport of oral argument

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion (1) The plaintiff did not receive prior notice of disposition from the defendant.

(2) The Plaintiff sold alcoholic beverages to the reported person who is the most likely to be a customer and arranged for a entertainment loan. The reported person is an aiding and abetting an illegal act. The disposition of this case based on evidence taken based on the above illegal act is unlawful.

In addition, the video taken by a civil petition reporter seems to have been operated.

(3) Abstract

Unlike the head of the Gu, the prohibition of drinking and drinking only in singing rooms is against the Constitution as an unfair regulation.

(4) The details of the instant case, the Plaintiff’s treatment by the right slot, etc., and the Plaintiff and his family members, who were the descendants of the persons of distinguished services to the national independence due to the operation of the instant business.