1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of ruling;

A. The Plaintiff is a person who conducts fee-charging job placement services with the trade name “C” in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

B. Around February 22, 1999, the head of Jung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City rendered a new permission for free job placement services to the Korea Food Service Federation, an incorporated association, pursuant to Article 18(1) of the Employment Security Act.

C. On June 25, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the head of the Jung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Central Food Service Federation for the revocation of a new permission for free placement services, and the head of the Jung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Central Food Service Federation rejected the Plaintiff’s application on the ground that it is not subject to the revocation of permission on July 28, 2014 after reviewing the data submitted by the Korea Food

On August 25, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a petition against the Defendant for a trial on performance of the duty to grant a new permission to the Korea Food Service Federation by the head of the Gu against the Korea Food Service Federation as of February 22, 1999.

E. On November 10, 2014, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim for administrative appeal on the ground that the head of Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government rendered a new permission disposition on February 22, 1999, which satisfies the requirements of the Employment Security Act.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the ruling of this case is lawful

A. The judgment of this case rendered by the defendant against the plaintiff is to be revoked because there are procedural defects as follows.

1) Although the Plaintiff filed an oral application in the administrative appeal procedure of this case, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s application in violation of Article 40 of the Administrative Appeals Act on October 21, 2014. 2) Although all evidential materials submitted in the administrative appeal procedure should be disclosed, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s application for inspection of evidentiary documents submitted by the head of Jung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and thereby the opportunity to supplement the Plaintiff’s assertion.