1. The Defendant’s assignment of “persons subject to enlistment in active service” against the Plaintiff on September 16, 2015 shall be revoked.

2...

The details and details of the disposition are those of students attending universities in around 2015, and according to the criteria for military service disposition specified in the “public notice of the execution of the draft physical in 2015” by the Commissioner of the Military Manpower Administration, in case of physical Grade 1, 2, and 3, in case of Grade 4, in case of Grade 4, in supplementary service, and in case of Grade 5, in case of Grade

On July 21, 2015 and July 27, 2015, the Plaintiff was subject to brain RI inspection, and as a result, 4 meters of the paper was found inside the left-hand side of the next Dual River.

The Plaintiff undergoes a draft physical examination on August 18, 2015, and only reduces convenience after the end of Article 11(1) [Attachment Table 2] [Attachment Table 2] 233(a) of the Inspection Rules, such as a draft physical examination, and is called “Article 233(a) of the Inspection Rules.”

A judgment of physical grade II was issued on the ground that it falls under the "rewing of the Central Communications Boundary".

Accordingly, the defendant was assigned to the plaintiff for enlistment in active duty service on the same day.

On August 20, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the result of the above draft physical examination, and the Defendant requested the Central Physical Examination Center to conduct a precise inspection on the Plaintiff.

On September 15, 2015, a doctor of the Central Physical Examination Center conducted a precise examination on the Plaintiff, and determined physical grade II on the ground that “The Plaintiff’s serious pathosiss are found in the mid-to long-term drilling boundary, but this constitutes “nicking species discovered as soon as it does not require internal and external treatment in addition to the full observation of progress” under Article 233(a) of the Inspection Rules.

Based on this, on September 16, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition of military service assignment to the Plaintiff for “persons subject to enlistment in active service.”

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). [In the absence of dispute, Gap 1, 2, and 3 evidence, Eul 1 and 2 evidence, and the purport of the entire pleadings is as follows: (a) a summary of the parties’ assertion, including the Plaintiff’s physical examination, etc., of the attached Table 2] No. 240(a) of the Rules of the Inspection is limited to “Article 240(a) of the Rules of the Inspection.”