1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. As the locally provided policyholders (Plaintiffs, B, C, and D) household to which the Plaintiff belongs fail to pay KRW 13,738,040 for 53 months from February 2008 to May 2016, the Defendant urged the payment of delinquent premiums over several occasions.

B. The Plaintiff filed an oral application with the Defendant for write-off of the above delinquent premium, but the Defendant rejected the application.

C. Around February 1, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the same content as the Defendant’s purport of the claim, but the Defendant dismissed it on March 16, 2017.

[Grounds for recognition] The fact that there has been no dispute, Eul's entry of No. 1, and the purport of whole pleading

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion does not have any property that the plaintiff holds after being exempted from bankruptcy. Thus, the defendant must write off the above delinquent premium in accordance with Article 84 (1) of the National Health Insurance Act.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. We examine ex officio the legality of the instant lawsuit.

The Plaintiff’s seeking a disposition on deficits against the Defendant is not allowed under the current Administrative Litigation Act, as a lawsuit for performance of obligations, which orders an administrative agency to actively engage in a certain act (see Supreme Court Decision 91Nu4126, Feb. 11, 1992). Even if the Plaintiff intended to seek a revocation of the disposition on refusal of deficits, according to the form and content of relevant provisions, such as Article 84(1) of the National Health Insurance Act and Article 50 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, etc., the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have the right to request the Defendant to make a disposition on deficits, and thus, the disposition on refusal of the said disposition does not constitute an administrative disposition subject

3. The lawsuit of this case is dismissed as it is unlawful.