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 operating a general restaurant (hereinafter “instant business”) with the trade name “C” in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si.

B. On January 22, 2014, in addition to the size of a place of business reported by the Plaintiff, it was discovered by a sanitation supervisor who inspected the site in accordance with the public interest report, on January 22, 2014, that he/she conducted food entertainment activities without reporting the change in the area of the place of business, by installing cooling facilities, other machinery, apparatus, bags, and chairs inside the relevant place of business, using three greenhouses, such as a plastic house, etc.

C. Accordingly, on February 11, 2014, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition imposing a penalty surcharge of KRW 16,80,000 in lieu of the 15th day of business suspension corresponding to the secondary violation, by applying Articles 75 and 832 of the Food Sanitation Act, and Article 89 of the Enforcement Rule of the Food Sanitation Act, on the ground of the Plaintiff’s violation of Article 37(4) of the same Act.

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on April 23, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 6, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. According to Article 75(1)7 of the Food Sanitation Act and Article 89(1)23 of the Enforcement Rule of the Food Sanitation Act, where a food service business operator fails to change the area of his/her place of business and make a report of change, the first and the second violations shall be subject to an administrative disposition of 7 days of business suspension and 15 days of business suspension in the event of the second violations. The standard of administrative disposition based on the frequency of violations shall apply to cases where "the same violation" has been committed for the last one year. In such cases, "the same violation" refers to cases where the violation after the first disposition was restored to its original state, such as changing the area of his/her place of business or expanding the area exceeding the existing area after the first disposition, both the first and the second violations are different.