1. The Defendant’s decision on disability ratings rendered to the Plaintiff on February 17, 2016 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 19, 2013, the Plaintiff requested a review of ratings of visual disabilities and was judged as Grade V. On September 3, 2014, the Plaintiff applied for the adjustment of ratings of visual disabilities and was determined as Grade V again.

B. On November 11, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the adjustment of the rating of visual disability, along with a written disability diagnosis by the head of the ordinary university hospital. The Defendant, on November 27, 2014, determined the rating of visual disability as class 5 and notified the Plaintiff on November 27, 2014, according to the results of the Advisory Council of

(hereinafter referred to as the “previous Disposition”). C.

On December 8, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the previous disposition of this case with this court. On December 8, 2015, this court rendered a judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim on the ground that the Plaintiff falls under class 1 or class 4 1 of visual impairment. The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

(Seoul District Court Decision 2015Guhap26 decided December 8, 2015, hereinafter “Related Cases”) D.

On January 12, 2016, the defendant determined the rating of visual disability as Class 3 and notified the plaintiff according to the ruling of related cases.

E. After that, on January 26, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for the adjustment of the class of visual disability with the Defendant accompanied by a new disability diagnosis certificate (hereinafter “instant diagnosis certificate”) stating the following:

On January 20, 2016, it is measured with 0.03 of the Postal Correction Trial Force and 0.03 of the Coordinate Correctional History as of January 2016.

It remains in the state that it remains not more than 5 degrees centering on both sides in the Pacific Inspection, implemented on December 1, 2015.

F. On January 26, 2016, the Defendant requested the National Pension Service to conduct a precise examination of the Plaintiff’s visual disability, and on February 17, 2016, the Plaintiff determined the Plaintiff’s visual disability rating at Grade 3 on the following grounds, based on the results of the Advisory Council of the National Pension Service.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). On June 2015 and November 201, 2015, the eyesight of the right eye is 0.06, left side.