1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From May 7, 1991, the Plaintiff maintained the status of a dependent under the National Health Insurance Act.

B. Around 2005, the Defendant received data from the National Tax Service that the Plaintiff obtained business income of KRW 2,500,000, and KRW 220,000 from the National Tax Service.

According to Article 5(2) and (3) of the former National Health Insurance Act (wholly amended by Act No. 11141, Dec. 31, 2011; hereinafter “former National Health Insurance Act”), Article 2(3)6 and Article 2(1) of the former Enforcement Rule of the National Health Insurance Act (wholly amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 157, Aug. 31, 2012; hereinafter “Enforcement Rule of the former National Health Insurance Act”), the Defendant deemed that the Plaintiff lost his/her eligibility as a dependent and recognized the Plaintiff as an individually insured person as of March 1, 2005.

Since then, the Defendant imposed the Plaintiff KRW 6,916,310 on the sum of each health insurance premium, expenses for disposition on default, and long-term care insurance premium stated in attached Table 1

(hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant dispositions”) C.

On October 28, 2014, the Plaintiff applied for recognition of the Plaintiff’s dependent status retroactively on March 1, 2005, since there was no income earned in addition to the income earned in KRW 1,587,00, and KRW 503,000 from the Defendant in 207.

On May 15, 2015, the Defendant accepted only a part of the Plaintiff’s application on December 1, 2006 through November 30, 2007, and recognized the Plaintiff’s family status retroactively from December 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 3, and 4 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is automatically null and void

A. The plaintiff's assertion does not have any income other than the income earned from 1,587,00 won in 2007 and 503,000 won in 208. Thus, each of the dispositions of this case on the erroneous premise that the plaintiff earned income from 2003 is reasonable.