The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Plaintiff’s assertion

According to the proviso to Article 10 (1) 3 of the Employment Insurance Act and Article 3-2 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, a public official with a fixed term position may also subscribe to employment insurance at his/her own will, and the head of the administrative agency appointing a public official with a fixed term position position shall confirm his/her intention to subscribe to employment insurance where a public official

Nevertheless, the defendant did not have confirmed his intention to subscribe to employment insurance with respect to the plaintiff who has served as a public official for three years, and accordingly, the plaintiff did not have an opportunity to subscribe to employment insurance. The defendant is responsible for the omission of the plaintiff's subscription to employment insurance and should pay the amount equivalent to the unemployment benefits stated in the purport

Although it is unclear whether the purport of the Plaintiff’s claim of a judgment ex officio falls under any of the types of litigation scheduled by the Administrative Litigation Act, it is not permissible to file a lawsuit against “Dongmun-gu Public Health Center,” which is not an administrative agency (Articles 13(1) and 38(1) of the Administrative Litigation Act) or the State, a public organization, and other rights-holder (Article 39 of the Administrative Litigation Act) that can serve as the Defendant, regardless of whether the lawsuit is an appeal litigation or a party suit. Thus, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, and it is not possible to correct the defects unless the Plaintiff does not comply with the order of correction as of November 12, 2020.

3. Conclusion, pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 219 of the Civil Procedure Act, the instant lawsuit is dismissed without holding any pleadings, and it is so decided as per Disposition.