1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders revocation below, shall be revoked.

Defendant.

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the disposition are the same as the description of the "1. Circumstances of the disposition" recorded on the second side of the judgment of the court of first instance, except with the phrase "five and five evidence" written on the second side of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, this part is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as stated in the part concerning “the Plaintiff’s assertion.” As such, the Plaintiff’s assertion is identical to the part concerning “the Plaintiff’s assertion” under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Therefore,

B. The reasons for the court’s explanation on this part, such as medical opinions, are as stated in the part of “as stated in 3-7 pages of the judgment of the first instance,” except for the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance as follows, or in the part of “medical opinion, etc.”. As such, this part is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 4

5 The term "this Court" shall be read as "court of the first instance" under the 5th page.

6쪽 1행의 “�나”를 “인한”으로, “드뭄”을 “드묾”으로 각 고친다.

Under 6, the term "Plaintiff X" of 9-10 shall be changed to "Plaintiff".

Under the 6th page, the term “satisfy” shall be read as “satisfy”.

The following shall be added between 6-7 below:

- It is presumed that it was difficult to recover a fluoral fluor due to the outbreak of a cerebral brain color on the left-hand side of the previous left-hand side. The first fluoral fluor is presumed that the fluoral fluor could have been able to recover from the damaged brain function on the upper-hand side of the damaged part, which is not damaged by the upper-hand brain function and damaged by the upper-hand side, but the second right-hand fluoral fluor.