1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Details of the lawsuit;

A. When filing the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff stated the purport of the claim in the complaint in the same content as the “claim” column, and stated the cause of the claim in the same manner as the attached Form invalidation and the claim for damages.

B. On January 12, 2017, the instant court issued an order of correction ordering the filing of the purport of the claim on the date of pleading, and on January 12, 2017, the Plaintiff submitted an amendment to the said order of correction on January 12, 2017.

C. On January 13, 2017, this court ordered the Plaintiff to revise the first claim that “the subject of the liability for damages, the other party, etc. clearly specify the purport of the claim, and specifically explain the legal basis of the claim, such as whether the cause of the claim is a tort under the Civil Act or a claim for State compensation under the State Compensation Act, and in detail explain the cause of the claim in accordance with the purport of the claim,” in relation to the second and third claims, “the parties, date, and contents of the administrative disposition that is the subject of the lawsuit, shall be specified, and the purport of the claim shall be stated in detail (the form of the lawsuit for performance of the obligation under the current Administrative Litigation Act is not allowed),” and “the cause of the claim shall be stated in detail

[Reasons for Recognition] The substantial facts in this Court and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. (1) In the course of accepting the Plaintiff, who is a disabled person, in the part of the claim No. 1, the Defendant filed a claim for compensation of KRW 40 million with respect to the part of the claim No. 2 with the Ministry of Justice, since the Defendant violated the Enforcement Decree of the Correctional Headquarters of the Ministry of Justice (Rules on the Punishment of the Ministry of Justice) and the Defendant violated the Enforcement Decree of the Correctional Headquarters of the Ministry of Justice (Rules on the Treatment of the Disabled Persons) and issued two gold orders against the Plaintiff, the Defendant sought revocation of the monetary disposition.

3. Part 3 of the claim.