1. The Defendant’s decision on October 6, 2015 against the Plaintiff is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. (i) Around September 2015, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as a self-pulmonary disability by the Seoul National University Hospital, and applied for new registration of a self-pulmonary disability under the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities to the Defendant.

B. On October 6, 2015, the Defendant rendered a “instant disposition” decision to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff failed to meet the standards for rating of self-pulmonary disability.

Article 25(1) of the Civil Act provides that the defendant shall file an objection against the disposition of this case, and the defendant shall be dismissed on December 24, 2015.

【Non-contentious facts, Gap evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 1-2, 1-2

2. (i) Whether the instant disposition is lawful, the key issue of the instant case is whether the Plaintiff falls under the classification criteria for a person with autism under the relevant statutes attached hereto.

B. From August 4, 2006 to September 1, 2015, the Plaintiff received medical treatment from the Seoul National University Hospital for the branch of Seoul National University during the period from August 4, 2015, and on September 1, 2015, the Plaintiff received a certificate of disability (Evidence 2 of the A), and the above certificate of disability was written as follows: “The above certificate of disability had a significant obstacle to development in the overall aspects of development, such as communication, sociality, behavior, etc. from Ninn city, and it constitutes a serious pulmonary disorder with K-CAR 30.5 (K-CAR 30.5) as a result of the recent prosecutor’s examination. The intelligence index or social well-being level of 83 years and 8 months (S=46) with the index, much more function than the actual age, and the daily self-help technology was not well good. The degree of concern, attack, and suicide is more likely to pose a serious threat to the actual function, and it is stated as GA 300.”

On December 2, 2015, the Plaintiff was issued with a disability certificate (Evidence 4) at the original Symnasium hospital at the school of the next generation. The above disability certificate states that “Intelligent Index 82, Social Index 48, K-AOS 120, and GAS 41-50.” The above disability certificate states that “Intelligent Index 82, Social Index 48, K-AOS 120, and GAS 41-50. The other person needs to be able to engage in daily and social life.”

This Court.