부작위위법확인
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and the appeal.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment on the plaintiff's assertion in the court of first instance to Paragraph 2 below. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Judgment on the Plaintiff’s additional assertion
A. Article 23(1)1 of the Administrative Procedure Act provides that the Plaintiff’s rejection of an application for approval to amend the articles of incorporation on March 6, 2020 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) was issued on the basis of an externally published permit criteria, and the Plaintiff did not clearly provide specific provisions that form the basis for the disposition. Thus, the Plaintiff asserts that an illegal disposition violates Article 23(1) of the Administrative Procedure Act, in violation of Article 23(1).
2) Article 23(1) of the Administrative Procedure Act provides that when an administrative agency takes a disposition, the administrative agency shall present the basis and reasons for the disposition to the parties. This purport is to exclude arbitrary decisions of the administrative agency and to enable the parties to properly cope with the administrative remedy procedure.
Therefore, in light of the contents of the written disposition and the relevant statutes, and the overall process, etc. up to the disposition, in a case where it is deemed that there was no particular obstacle to the party to the disposition to proceed to an administrative remedy procedure, the following facts are acknowledged in light of each of the following facts in the written disposition, even though the grounds and reasons for the disposition are not specified in the written disposition (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Du65718, Jan. 31, 2019, etc.). (See Supreme Court Decision 2016Du65718, Jan. 31, 2019, etc.).
A) ① The Defendant is a party to the instant case.