1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff’s taxation on the Defendant Republic of Korea added at the trial.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: “A person who raises an objection” under Section 3 of Section 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance; “A person who has raised an objection and filed the lawsuit of this case within seven days thereafter.” In addition to adding the following judgment to the claims added in the court of first instance, the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows; thus, the same shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant Republic of Korea’s taxation disposition (hereinafter “instant taxation disposition”) which imposed capital gains tax on F with respect to the Plaintiff’s claim added in the trial is null and void due to the material and apparent defect. As such, the Plaintiff sought confirmation of the invalidity of the said taxation disposition against the Defendant Republic of Korea.

In the event that a plaintiff made a mistake in a civil litigation against a case that the plaintiff should file an administrative litigation without intention or gross negligence, even if the lawsuit does not have jurisdiction over such administrative litigation, it is obvious that the litigation requirements as an administrative litigation are satisfied, such as the prior trial procedure and the period of filing the lawsuit already lapsed, or the disposition subject to the administrative litigation is not in the absence of any disposition, etc., even though the lawsuit is filed as an administrative litigation, and thus, it is inappropriate to dismiss it as an illegal lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da28960, May 30, 1997). An administrative litigation seeking the revocation or invalidation of an administrative disposition shall be the defendant, unless otherwise specifically provided for in other Acts, the administrative agency having conducted an administrative disposition, etc., which is the subject

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Nu14688, Dec. 22, 1995). In light of the above legal principles, health care costs for the instant case, and the part on which the Plaintiff seeks confirmation of invalidity of the taxation disposition of this case against the Defendant Republic of Korea is to be filed as a civil litigation.