A. The plaintiff is a student attending the D secondary school located in Busan, whose head is the defendant.

B. On June 20, 2017, the Plaintiff is smoking in the vicinity of the above school at the point of time.

On June 22, 2017, the Plaintiff asked the Plaintiff, who was aware of the Plaintiff’s abdomination during the Abdomination hours, and asked the Plaintiff whether the Plaintiff was able to smoke.

C. Accordingly, based on Article 18 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and Article 31(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (attached Form), the Defendant held a guidance committee on June 30, 2017 to determine the disciplinary action (i.e., disciplinary action) on three days of internal teaching service (from July 10, 2017 to July 12, 2017) due to the change of class due to the infringement of the right to teach, (ii) three days of special education, (iii) number of labor-management programs, and (iii) lack of internal teaching capacity, and (iv) notify the Plaintiff thereof on July 4, 2017.

On September 5, 2017, the Plaintiff’s father B filed the instant lawsuit seeking the revocation of each of the above disciplinary actions, and the Defendant, on September 20, 2017, held a leading commission on guidance and revoked ex officio and notified the Plaintiff on September 28, 2017, for revocation of the disciplinary action against the replacement of class, three days of special education, and the number of labor union adjustment programs (hereinafter “measures for the replacement of class, etc.”).

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the defendant's main defense of safety

(a) If an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition shall lose its validity and no longer exists, and a revocation suit against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

(2) On April 29, 2010 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Du16879, Apr. 29, 2010). According to the above facts, the Defendant’s revocation ex officio of the disposition, such as the replacement of class during the instant lawsuit, etc., the part seeking revocation of the disposition, such as the replacement of class, in the instant lawsuit, is unlawful as it

(b).