1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate

A. Even if a lawsuit seeking the revocation of an administrative disposition is lawful at the time of filing a lawsuit, if a disposition agency ex officio revokes an administrative disposition subject to dispute during the duration of the lawsuit, the disposition loses its validity and does not exist any longer. Thus, an appeal suit against the disposition that does not exist, in principle, is unlawful because the interests of the lawsuit are extinguished.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2018Du49130 decided June 27, 2019, etc.). B.

According to the purport of Eul evidence No. 5 and the whole pleadings, the defendant recognized that the person subject to disposition and the illegal vehicle was mistakenly designated, and according to the purport of Gap evidence No. 6 and all pleadings, which were pending in the lawsuit of this case, the disposition stated in the purport of the claim No. 6, which was stated in the purport of the lawsuit of this case, seems to have existed on July 1, 2019, not on May 20, 2019, but on July 1, 2019.

the Plaintiff may be deemed to have revoked the above disposition and notified the Plaintiff of the withdrawal of the disposition.

Therefore, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it seeks revocation of a disposition that has not already been extinguished, as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

2. As such, the instant lawsuit is unlawful and dismissed, and the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendant pursuant to Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.