2. After filing an application to designate a date on June 22, 2016.

The Plaintiff was present at the first date for pleading ( March 23, 2016) but was absent on the second date for pleading ( April 27, 2016) designated and notified at the first date for pleading, and the Defendant litigation performer was present at the second date for pleading, but did not present at the second date for pleading.

B. On May 2, 2016, the Plaintiff was absent on the third day for pleading ( May 11, 2016) even after being served with a notice of due date for pleading on May 2, 2016, and the Defendant litigation performer was present at the third day for pleading, but did not present at the third day for pleading.

C. On June 22, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for designation of the date, stating that “Although the instant lawsuit was deemed to have been withdrawn on June 14, 2016, the Plaintiff was an alien who was unrelated to the Korean law, and thus, the date was set again.”

2. According to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 268 of the Civil Procedure Act, both parties were absent or present at least twice on the date of pleading, which determined the validity of the deemed withdrawal of action.

Even if an application for designating a date is not filed within one month after the pleading is not made, the lawsuit shall be deemed to have been withdrawn.

According to the above facts, the plaintiff was absent on the second and third legal date for pleading even after being notified of the legitimate date, the defendant litigation performer was present on each such legal date for pleading, but did not present, and the plaintiff did not file an application to designate the date within one month thereafter, and the lawsuit in this case was terminated on June 14, 2016.

3. In conclusion, the instant lawsuit is deemed to have been withdrawn on June 14, 2016, and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition by the declaration of termination of the lawsuit.