1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the disposition are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. We examine ex officio the determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit. If an administrative disposition is revoked, the disposition loses its validity, and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

(2) In light of the purport of the Plaintiff’s written evidence No. 10 and the entire argument, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, separate from the instant lawsuit, and on the premise that, in the course of administrative appeals, the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling on October 17, 2018, it is reasonable to deem the instant factory as an independent place of business from the Plaintiff’s headquarters when applying the Employment Insurance Act to the administrative appeals procedure, the Plaintiff was subject to employment maintenance measures against the entire insured of the instant factory, and employees of the Plaintiff’s headquarters and Seoul branch were not employees belonging to the instant factory, and thus, the Plaintiff’s head office and Seoul branch office were not employees belonging to the instant factory, and thus, the Defendant’s refusal of employment maintenance measures against the Plaintiff for the period of employment maintenance measures and employment adjustment during one month thereafter constitutes an illegal or unjust disposition, and then revoked the instant disposition.

Therefore, the instant disposition becomes retroactively null and void by the ruling on revocation, and thus, the instant lawsuit seeking the revocation of a disposition that does not exist, and became unlawful as there was no benefit of lawsuit.

3. Thus, the lawsuit of this case is brought.