1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

The plaintiff operates a general restaurant (hereinafter referred to as the "instant restaurant") in Nowon-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

On January 4, 2019, at around 18:00, the Plaintiff sold alcoholic beverages equivalent to KRW 24,000 in total amount of KRW 24,00 per week 1 disease, beer, and beer 1 disease (3,000c) without verifying identification card to three juveniles, including juveniles D (15 years of age, Nam).

(hereinafter “instant violation”). On March 28, 2019, the Plaintiff was issued a summary order of KRW 500,000 from the Seoul Northern District Court to a fine of KRW 500,000 as a violation of the Juvenile Protection Act in relation to the instant violation (hereinafter “instant summary order”), and the said summary order became final and conclusive around that time.

From May 2, 2019 to May 2, 2019, the Defendant provided the Plaintiff with alcoholic beverages to juveniles as in the instant violation, and from May 27, 2019, the two-month period of business suspension.

7. Disposition by no later than 25. (hereinafter “instant disposition”)

The Plaintiff filed an application for adjudication with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission. However, on July 22, 2019, the said administrative appeals commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application, and the Defendant changed the period of the instant disposition from September 25, 2019 to November 23, 2019. [In the absence of any dispute over the grounds for recognition, the Plaintiff’s spouse did not raise any doubt as to whether the instant disposition was legitimate, since the Plaintiff’s spouse inspected the identification card against one of three juveniles, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s spouse did not, on his/her own initiative and ice, inspect the identification card against one of the three juveniles.

As such, the instant disposition was abused or abused the scope of discretion when considering the fact that the Plaintiff did not have intentionally committed an existing illegal act, and that the Plaintiff’s economic situation is not good.

The attached details of the relevant statutes shall be as specified in the statutes.

Judgment

The punitive administrative disposition is the same.