1. Among the plaintiff's lawsuit, the defendant's additional military service subsidy of KRW 30,362,00 for the defendant's co-litigants is returned.

Details of the disposition

Around March 2016, an intervenor was selected as a military scholarship and entered the Department of C University D, and paid registration fees with subsidies for additional military service paid by the Defendant for a total of six semesters from 1 semester to 2018, even from 2016.

The plaintiff and E are the parents of the intervenor.

The Intervenor obtained the credits of 1.86 at the average point of 1.86 (the full point was 4.5) in the second semester of 2018, and the C University removed the Intervenor on February 18, 2019.

On February 18, 2019, the Defendant revoked the selection of military scholarship students against the Intervenor on the ground that “the university student status to receive additional military service subsidies was revoked as the Intervenor was removed from the military register.” On the other hand, the Defendant notified the Intervenor’s parents (the Plaintiff, E), and F corporation of the total amount of subsidies for military service of KRW 30,362,00 (i.e., the amount of subsidies for military service of KRW 10,806,000 for the year 2016 to the year 10,778,000 for the year 2017 to the year 9,778,000 for the year 2018 to the year 2018 (hereinafter “instant subsidies”).

[2] Of the above, the Plaintiff and the Intervenor received the above notification on February 20, 2019. The Plaintiff and the Intervenor received the above notification on the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s disposition against the Plaintiff as “the instant return disposition (the Plaintiff)”; (b) the disposition against the Intervenor as “the instant return disposition (the Intervenor); (c) the Intervenor’s disposition against the Intervenor as “the instant return disposition (the Intervenor); and

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the intervenor's assertion that the plaintiff and the intervenor suffered conflict as to whether they continue their studies due to additional adaptation to major subjects from the second semester of 2016.

In this situation, the intervenor has been seriously removed from the military service subsidy system in 2018, but has been making continuous efforts to achieve the objective of the military service subsidy system, and did not intentionally neglect his efforts.

Nevertheless, it is not possible.