1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The total cost of a lawsuit shall be borne individually by each party.

purport.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the decision of the court of first instance is the same as the pertinent part of the reasoning of the decision of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the

2. The attachment to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be as follows;

3. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. On July 4, 2019, when the first instance trial was pending, the Plaintiff leased a part of the third floor of the building where the instant private teaching institute was located and filed the instant application, and on July 4, 2019, when the first instance trial was held, the Plaintiff leased all of the third floor of the building where the instant private teaching institute was located, and submitted to the Defendant an application for the change of the location of the instant private teaching institute along with a facility plan attached to the instant private teaching institute facility. After which, at the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff partially modified the facility plan attached to the said application (i.e., the change in the form of a passage between lecture rooms) and submitted it again. Accordingly, the Defendant accepted the said application on July 30, 2019.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, upon receiving the instant disposition from the Defendant on July 30, 2019, could operate the instant private teaching institute within the building located in the location of the building where the registration of modification was requested from the time of the instant application, and the actual utility or practical benefit to dispute the illegality of the instant disposition has been lost due to a trial. Therefore, there is no legal interest to seek the cancellation of the instant disposition.

B. Since a lawsuit seeking the cancellation of an illegal administrative disposition is a lawsuit seeking the restoration to its original state by removing the illegal state caused by the illegal disposition, and protecting or remedying the rights and interests infringed or interfered with the disposition, it is theoretical sense to dispute the illegality of any administrative disposition.

Even if there is no practical utility or benefit to resolve by a trial, there is no benefit to file a lawsuit seeking revocation.

Supreme Court Decision 99 delivered on September 1998