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

On November 26, 2014, the defendant issued a civil petition reply to the effect that the plaintiff cannot be awarded a decoration on the ground that the reward in Vietnam War was delegated to the commander of the Jeju War at the time, and the reward was granted and completed through the procedure of public examination, etc. on the spot.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant civil petition petition” (hereinafter referred to as “this case’s civil petition petition”), which is without dispute, and the Plaintiff’s assertion of the purport of the entries and arguments in Gap’s No. 5 as to September 9, 1967, as the so-called officer of the guard office belonging to B, from September 14, 1968 to September 17, 1969, the Plaintiff was unable to receive an order of merit because the public examination was conducted in the form of formal review.

Therefore, even though the defendant recommended the plaintiff as a person subject to decoration and refused to award the order, the civil petition of this case is unlawful.

As to the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case, it cannot be deemed that the plaintiff has the right to file a petition under the law or sound reasoning to require the defendant to award an order to the defendant. Thus, the civil petition of this case does not constitute an administrative disposition that is the subject of an appeal litigation.

Judgment

We examine whether the civil petition of this case constitutes an administrative disposition subject to appeal litigation.

If an administrative agency’s refusal of a citizen’s application constitutes an administrative disposition subject to an administrative litigation, the administrative agency must have the right to request the citizen’s action under the relevant law or sound reasoning, and if an administrative agency does not accept a citizen’s application not based on such right, the refusal shall constitute the applicant’s right or legal interest.