1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 25, 1998, the Plaintiff was suffering from brain damage due to a traffic accident while driving the Oral Ba, and around April 2014, Article 32 of the former Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (amended by Act No. 13366, Jun. 22, 2015; hereinafter “former Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities”) and Articles 3 and 7 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 343, Aug. 3, 2015; hereinafter “former Enforcement Rule of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities”).

B. On August 5, 2015, the Plaintiff applied for a re-determination of disability grades 2, unlike the content of the instant Disposition No. 1, since it had suffered from the Defendant, and accordingly, the Plaintiff applied for a re-determination of disability ratings. However, on August 31, 2015, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have aggravated symptoms of cerebral disease after the instant Disposition No. 1, thereby receiving a re-determination of disability ratings 5 in the cerebral disease.

C. On November 12, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the above disposition with the Defendant, but on November 25, 2015, received a disposition of disability rating 5 from the Defendant on the same basis as that of the brain disease.

Then, on March 2, 2016, the Plaintiff applied for the adjustment of the disability grade again to the Defendant, but on April 22, 2016, received again from the Defendant the determination of the disability grade 5 on the brain disease (hereinafter “instant Disposition 2”).

E. Although the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant Disposition No. 2 with the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission, it was dismissed on July 27, 2016, and filed the instant lawsuit on September 23, 2016.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 through 3 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The attachment to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be as follows;

3. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. Although the Plaintiff’s assertion suffers from a disability equivalent to the second degree of brain disease, the Defendant’s disability grade at the 5th degree of brain disease.