1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part demanding the revocation of the disposition of “the imposition of insurance premium Nos. 1 through 16” as indicated in the attached Table, and dependent persons.

1. Details and details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, as a spouse of an employment provided policyholder B under the National Health Insurance Act, did not pay health insurance premiums and long-term care insurance premiums to the Defendant from the date of acquiring the insured status.

B. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff is the sectional owner (No. 48, 49) of the “D” located in the Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) and the owner (No. 27) of the second floor of the instant commercial building (hereinafter “instant business site”) including the Plaintiff completed the business registration on July 12, 2012, with the term “trade name: D2nd floor and type of business: Real Estate Lease.”

(hereinafter referred to as “instant business registration”). C.

Around August 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that “the Plaintiff becomes disqualified as a dependent on September 1, 2014,” on the ground that the Plaintiff’s business income was generated.

(hereinafter “instant Notice 1”) D.

The defendant regarded the plaintiff as the individually insured, calculated the monthly insurance premium as shown in the attached Table, and imposed and notified it.

The notice shall be sent to the plaintiff's address by ordinary mail and shall not be returned thereafter.

(hereinafter referred to as “the imposition of insurance premium 1 in order”) by the sequence is referred to as “the imposition of insurance premium 1 in order,” and all of them are referred to as “each disposition of this case.”

In addition, on December 29, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the purport that “it is limited to the Plaintiff’s insurance benefits until the delinquent premium is paid in full,” and the Plaintiff was served on January 4, 2016 by the Plaintiff.

(f) (hereinafter “instant notice”). On February 1, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Defendant seeking revocation of the instant notice Nos. 1 and 2, and the Defendant dismissed the part seeking revocation of the instant notice No. 1 on March 25, 2016 on the ground that “the period for filing an objection expires” and the part seeking revocation of the instant notice No. 2 was dismissed on the ground that “the period for filing an objection is not defective.”

[Reasons for Recognition] There is no dispute.