1. The part of the instant lawsuit seeking the revocation of a decision-making disposition other than the rating of a safe disability shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 15, 2002, the Plaintiff was registered as a disabled person of the third degree of mental disability on March 15, 2002. 2) The Defendant requested the National Pension Service, which is an institution specialized in disability grade review (hereinafter “Corporation”), to examine the Plaintiff’s disability grade upon the Plaintiff’s arrival of the period of disability grade determination. On January 14, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Service that the Plaintiff’s mental disorder was examined as “out class” and notified the Plaintiff of the results of the examination on January 16, 2015.

3) On April 22, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the result of the review by the Corporation. However, on May 26, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision on “out-class” to the Plaintiff on May 26, 2015, according to the result of the review by the Corporation. (b) The Plaintiff filed an application for registration of visual disability registration with the Defendant on December 19, 2014. (2) The Defendant requested the Corporation to review the Plaintiff’s disability grade; (c) notified the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff’s visual disability was “outclass 5” on February 16, 2015; and (d) notified the Plaintiff of the result of the review on May 26, 2015. However, the Defendant filed an objection against the result of the review by the Corporation to the Defendant on May 16, 2015, based on the results of the review by the Corporation, determined the Plaintiff to be “out class 5” and “out class 5”.

As a result of an administrative appeal, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the ordinary Nam-do Administrative Appeals Commission, but on September 23, 2015, the Plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed on September 23, 2015, seeking the revocation of a decision on “non-grade” disposition, and the part seeking the revocation of each of the dispositions

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, 8, 16, 17, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The attachment to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be as follows;

3. The revocation of the decision-making disposition on the “out-class” of the instant lawsuit, which affected the safety disorder.