1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the director of the Seoul Regional Military Manpower Office shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's defendant Busan Regional Military Manpower Office.

Details of the disposition

As a result of a physical examination for conscription on September 2, 2009, the Plaintiff was included in the enlistment for active duty service after being judged at Grade III as a result of the physical examination for conscription, and was thereafter included in the enlistment for active duty service on September 2, 2018.

On September 20, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for change of assignment of military service with the director of the regional military manpower office of Busan, on the ground of a disturbance.

As a result of an inspection conducted on October 4, 2018 with respect to the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s draft physical examiner at the director general of the Busan regional military manpower office determined that the Plaintiff’s threshold disorder falls under physical grade 2, considering that the Plaintiff’s physical grade 39-A-1 of the standards for the degree and evaluation of illness and mental and physical disorder (hereinafter “instant evaluation criteria”) such as the draft physical examination, etc., and the Defendant’s director general of the Busan regional military manpower office assigned the Plaintiff to be enlisted in active service on the same day (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

(2) On November 8, 2018, the head of the Seoul Regional Military Manpower Office notified the Plaintiff of enlistment in active duty service to the Plaintiff by December 11, 2018, according to the 28th typhoons’s typhoons training (hereinafter “instant notification disposition”).

(2) On the other hand, on December 3, 2018, this Court rendered a decision to suspend the execution of the instant notification disposition by 14 days after the date of the instant judgment (2018 A. 291), and the Defendant Seoul Military Manpower Office delayed the date of enlistment of the Plaintiff ex officio. [In the absence of any dispute over grounds for recognition, the entries in Gap 1, 2, Eul 1, and 2, and the entire purport of the pleadings, and whether the Plaintiff’s lawsuit against the Seoul Military Manpower Office’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the Plaintiff’s lawsuit against the Defendant Military Manpower Office, the Defendant Seoul Military Manpower Office’s assertion of the instant notification disposition by ex officio postponement of the instant notification disposition by the Seoul Military Manpower Office, and thus, the Plaintiff has no legal interest to seek the revocation of

Judgment

A litigation for revocation may be instituted by a person who has a legal interest in seeking the revocation of a disposition, etc.