1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entry and the entire argument in subparagraph 1, the Defendant deemed that the Plaintiff donated KRW 30,000,000 from B on November 19, 2007, and accordingly, notified the Plaintiff of the decision of KRW 4,515,750 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on October 11, 2013. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the court, and the Defendant may recognize the fact that the instant disposition was revoked ex officio on August 27, 2015, which is the date of closing the argument.

When an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition shall lose its effect due to the revocation, and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against non-existent administrative disposition shall be unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

However, according to the above facts of recognition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Du5317, Sept. 28, 2006), the defendant revoked the disposition of this case on August 27, 2015, where the lawsuit of this case is pending, ex officio. The lawsuit of this case is seeking revocation of the disposition of this case which is no longer effective due to the defendant's ex officio revocation, and it is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

Thus, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and dismissed, and the lawsuit cost is to be borne by the defendant pursuant to Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.