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 was subject to a disposition of business suspension from December 14, 2015 to February 11, 2016, as a person who runs the lodging business in the name of “C” in Busan Seo-gu.

B. On January 13, 2016, the Defendant visited C on January 13, 2016, confirmed that the Plaintiff received KRW 10,00 from one male grandchild on his/her name from 303 and had him/her know about his/her name. On February 17, 2016, the Defendant issued an order to close the place of business in accordance with the Public Health Control Act on the ground that the Plaintiff was running his/her

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal, and the Busan Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission changed the disposition to close down a place of business on March 29, 2016 as the disposition of business suspension three months.

Accordingly, on May 17, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition of business suspension against the Plaintiff for three months (from June 7, 2016 to September 4, 2016).

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] A. 3, 4, 7, each entry in Gap’s Evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was subject to the disposition of suspension of business and presented all long-term guests. However, the Plaintiff did not show vehicles and horses on the ground that the guests 303 were not in the body of their body and the strings were not in the body of their body.

Moreover, since the Plaintiff did not receive monthly rent during that period, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff engaged in business during the period of business suspension.

In addition, the plaintiff is a woman for his livelihood. Since the disposition of this case is likely to receive a large amount of shooting, the disposition of this case is unlawful by abusing and abusing discretion.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

C. (1) In full view of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 8, 9, Eul evidence Nos. 8, and the purport of the entire argument as a result of the plaintiff's newspaper, the defendant's letter of confirmation asked from the plaintiff on Jan. 13, 2016, "one male loss in the name of 303 regardless of the period of suspension of business due to the arrangement of commercial sex acts."