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

On May 24, 2002, the Plaintiff has maintained a marital life after reporting the marriage with B. On September 13, 2005, the Plaintiff was subject to a disposition of suspension of indictment as stated in the purport of the claim from the Busan District Prosecutors' Office on September 13, 2005 (hereinafter “instant disposition of suspension of indictment”).

Therefore, the Defendant should delete the disposition of suspending prosecution of this case entered in the Plaintiff’s investigation record materials.

We examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio on the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.

In accordance with the current Administrative Litigation Act, a performance suit seeking the implementation of administrative disposition against an administrative agency is not acknowledged (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Nu4126, Feb. 11, 1992). However, the instant lawsuit seeking the cancellation of the suspension of indictment against the Defendant, which is recorded in the investigation record materials, constitutes a performance suit that allows the administrative agency to take a certain disposition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Nu4126, Feb. 11, 1992). However, even if the instant lawsuit is intended to seek the cancellation of the part of the suspension of indictment, which is recorded in the Plaintiff’s investigation record materials, it cannot be deemed a disposition that is subject to an appeal litigation under the Administrative Litigation Act, and