1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 6, 2016, the Plaintiff was issued a disposition of suspension of indictment on the violation of the Juvenile Protection Act, which read, “A” (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) is a person operating food and accommodation business under the trade name of “C,” in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office at the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office around April 20, 2016, providing liquor to one juvenile at the instant restaurant around 23:55.”

B. On July 7, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition of business suspension for one month to the Plaintiff on the ground that the instant restaurant provided alcoholic beverages to juveniles.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap’s evidence Nos. 2, Eul’s evidence Nos. 3 through 9, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) was that three customers first entering the restaurant of this case were adults, and two customers, among the customers first entering the restaurant, joined the restaurant to work as a juvenile, and one of them was a juvenile, and the Plaintiff did not provide alcoholic beverages to juveniles.

Therefore, in light of the above facts, the instant disposition constitutes a case where there is no ground for disposition.

(2) Considering the circumstances that may be considered in the process of detection, and the economic situation of the Plaintiff’s faced, the instant disposition was excessively harsh to the Plaintiff, thereby abusing discretion.

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

C. Sanction against a violation of administrative laws and regulations regarding the existence of grounds for disposition is a sanction against the objective fact of violation of administrative laws and regulations in order to achieve administrative purposes. Thus, not only a real offender but also a person designated as a person in charge of law and regulations may be imposed. In principle, no intentional negligence of the violator is required. However, it cannot be caused by a violation of the duty of the violator.