1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the reasons for the decision of the court of first instance are the same as the corresponding part of the reasons for the decision of the court of first instance. Thus, this part of the reasons are cited by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of

2. We examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio on the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.

If an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition shall lose its validity and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition shall be unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

(2) The Plaintiff’s lawsuit in this case is unlawful, since the Defendant’s revocation of the instant disposition on May 14, 2015 is recognized ex officio, based on the following facts: (a) the instant disposition has already become extinct and there is no legal interest in seeking its revocation; and (b) the Plaintiff’s lawsuit in this case is unlawful.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is dismissed as it has no interest in lawsuit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair, and thus the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked and the lawsuit of this case is dismissed. The total costs of lawsuit are assessed against the defendant under Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.