1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The grounds for the court’s explanation on this part are the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. The Defendant asserts that the instant dismissal decision does not constitute a disposition or adjudication directly related to the Plaintiff’s rights and duties or other legal relations, and thus, the instant lawsuit seeking revocation of the instant dismissal decision is unlawful.

B. The term “disposition, etc.” subject to appeal litigation means the exercise or refusal of public authority as an enforcement of law with respect to a specific fact by an administrative agency, other corresponding administrative actions (hereinafter “disposition”) and an adjudication on an administrative appeal.

(1) Article 2(1)1 of the Administrative Litigation Act (Article 2(1)1) of the same Act). In order to be lawful in an appeal litigation, an administrative disposition that is subject to an appeal litigation shall fall under “disposition, etc.”, i.e., disposition, etc., disposition or adjudication. An administrative disposition that is subject to an appeal litigation refers to an act of an administrative agency’s public law that directly changes in specific rights and obligations of citizens, such as ordering the establishment of rights or the burden of obligations with respect to a specific matter, or giving rise to other legal effects. An act that does not directly cause legal changes in the legal status of the other party or other related persons

(see Supreme Court Decision 2014Du5637, Dec. 27, 2016). The Defendant’s dismissal decision is the same.