1. On July 2, 2015, the Defendant limited to the Attorney Disciplinary Committee of the Korean Bar Association, No. 2015-2, and No. 2015-3.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 3, 2014, the chief prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office (hereinafter “the chief prosecutor”) applied to the president of the Korean Bar Association (hereinafter “the president of the Korean Bar Association”) for the commencement of disciplinary action against the Plaintiffs on the same grounds as the “reasons for the commencement of disciplinary action” in attached Table 1.

(hereinafter referred to as “application for the commencement of the instant disciplinary action”). (b)

On January 27, 2015, the president of the Defense Association rendered a decision to dismiss the application for the commencement of the instant disciplinary action on the same ground as stated in the “reasons for the dismissal of the commencement of disciplinary action” attached Form 2.

(hereinafter referred to as the “determination of dismissal of the president of the Association”).

On February 13, 2015, the chief prosecutor filed an objection (No. 2015-2 and 2015-3) with the Korean Bar Association Disciplinary Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Korean Bar Association Disciplinary Committee”). On March 30, 2015, the Korean Bar Association Disciplinary Committee dismissed each of the above objections.

(hereinafter referred to as “decision to dismiss the instant objection”). D.

On May 11, 2015, the chief prosecutor filed an objection against the Defendant. On July 2, 2015, the Defendant revoked the decision to dismiss the instant objection and rendered the instant decision to commence disciplinary proceedings against the Plaintiffs.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 9, Eul evidence 1 to 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. To make entries in attached Form 3 of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

3. Whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate

A. Whether a certain act of an administrative agency can be the subject of an appeal cannot be determined abstractly and generally, and it should be determined individually, taking into account the content and purport of the relevant Act and subordinate statutes, the subject, content, form, and procedure of the act, the substantial relation between the act and the disadvantage suffered by interested parties, such as the other party, and the attitude of the administrative agency and interested parties related to the pertinent act, in mind of the law enforcement with regard to specific facts by the administrative agency as the public authority.