{¶ 37} Further, we note that in a case from this court similar to the within case, this court "emphasized that [it] need not consider [the applicant's] argument * * * that the board is required to provide reasons in support of its decision or that there is a burden-shifting standard within the statutory process." Buckeye Relief, L.L.C. v. State Bd. of Pharmacy, 2020-Ohio-4916, 160 N.E.3d 767, ¶ 24 (8th Dist.).

Ohio Historical Soc, 66 Ohio St.3d at 471, 613 N.E.2d 591; VFW Post 8586 v. Ohio Liquor Control Comm., 83 Ohio St.3d 79, 81, 697 N.E.2d 655 (1998). Bartchy v. State Bd. of Edn., 120 Ohio St.3d 205, 2008-Ohio-4826, 897 N.E.2d 1096, ¶ 37; Buckeye Relief L.L.C v. State Bd. of Pharmacy, 2020-Ohio-4916, 160 N.E.3d 767, ¶ 17 (8th Dist.). With respect to a purely legal inquiry, while the reviewing trial court must defer to the agency's findings of facts, it "must construe the law on its own."

Ohio Historical Soc, 66 Ohio St.3d at 471, 613 N.E.2d 591; VFW Post 8586 v. Ohio Liquor Control Comm., 83 Ohio St.3d 79, 81, 697 N.E.2d 655 (1998). Bartchy v. State Bd. of Edn., 120 Ohio St.3d 205, 2008-Ohio-4826, 897 N.E.2d 1096, ¶ 37; Buckeye Relief, L.L.C. v. State Bd. of Pharm., 2020-Ohio-4916, 160 N.E.3d 767, ¶ 17 (8th Dist); see also Capital Care Network at ¶ 25 (An administrative appeal to the common pleas court "does not provide a trial de novo"; "where the agency's decision is supported by sufficient evidence and the law, the common pleas court lacks authority to review the agency's exercise of discretion, even if its decision is 'admittedly harsh.'"), quoting Henry's Cafe, Inc. v. Bd. ofLiquor Control, 170 Ohio St. 233, 236-237, 163 N.E.2d 678 (1959).