The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Busan High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. The "date when the person becomes aware of the disposition, etc.", which is the starting point of the filing period of a lawsuit as prescribed by Article 20(1) of the Administrative Litigation Act means the date when the person became aware of the fact that the disposition was

(1) The Supreme Court Decision 201Nu6521 Decided June 28, 191 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Du11706, Nov. 12, 2009; Supreme Court Decision 201Du31635, Nov. 15, 2012; etc.). In cases of an administrative disposition involving the other party, barring any special provision, the period for filing a lawsuit under Article 20(1) of the Administrative Litigation Act ought to be deemed to run when the other party becomes aware of the existence of an administrative disposition by notifying the other party of such fact, and the other party becomes aware of such fact.

2. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the record, following the enforcement of the Act on Assistance to Patients suffering from Actual aftereffects of defoliants, which was amended by Act No. 11203, Jan. 17, 2012, the Defendant determined the Plaintiff as a “person of distinguished service to the State of Distinguished Service to the State of Grade VII,” through a written draft physical examination. Upon the Plaintiff’s written draft physical examination, the Defendant conducted a written draft physical examination, and then served the Plaintiff on August 27, 2012, a written notice of notification that determined the Plaintiff as a “person of distinguished service to the State of Grade VII” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

Examining these facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the instant disposition is an administrative disposition on which the other party exists and should be notified to the other party unless otherwise provided.