1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 27, 1987, the Plaintiff entered the department of accounts at the University Management University, and was entrusted with the president and the director of C. In particular, on May 8, 1986, the Plaintiff led various demonstrations, including an open demonstration within the B University. Based on this, on March 13, 1987, the Gwangju District Court sentenced the Plaintiff to a suspension of qualification for three years due to the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, and was sentenced to a suspension of qualification for three years from August 20, 1986 to February 27, 198. On March 27, 1987, the Committee recognized the Plaintiff’s restoration of honor and compensation for democratization movement-related persons under Article 2(d) of the Act on the Compensation for Democratization Movement (hereinafter “Act on the Compensation for Democratization Movement”) on the grounds that the Plaintiff was convicted of his/her school affairs on March 25, 2002.

B. On February 24, 2016, the Plaintiff filed the instant application to the Defendant.

For the same reasons as seen in this paragraph, an application for the payment of compensation under Article 22 of the Act on the Compensation, etc. for Persons Related to the May 18 Democratization Movement (hereinafter “5/18 Compensation Act”) was filed.

C. On December 15, 2016, the subcommittee on the examination of whether the Defendant’s May 18 Democratization Movement was related to the instant disposition rendered a decision not to grant permission to engage in happiness, confinement, and punishment on the grounds that it is difficult to deem the Plaintiff to have been detained in relation to May 18 Democratization Movement. On February 22, 2017, the Defendant dismissed the instant application on the grounds that it is difficult to recognize the Plaintiff as a person related to May 18 Democratization Movement.

hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case"

(i) [In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, entry of Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the disposition of this case is unlawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 constitutes a person related to May 18 Democratization Movement, and the Plaintiff led various demonstrations related to May 18 Democratization Movement.