Invalidity, such as revocation of a decision

2. The head of △△△;

2. The costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

Preliminary purport: Decision to dismiss each objection described in paragraph (1) of this Article, and each disciplinary procedure;

The decision of commencement (the decision of revocation and the decision of commencement in this case referred to as the "decision in this case") shall be revoked.

A. On November 3, 2014, the chief prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office (hereinafter referred to as the "chief prosecutor") filed an application for commencement of disciplinary action against the plaintiffs on the grounds as stated in the attached Table 1, with the president of the Korean Bar Association (hereinafter referred to as the "President of the Korean Bar Association") on November 3, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as the "application for commencement of disciplinary action").

B. On January 27, 2015, the president of the Defense Association rendered a decision to dismiss the application for the commencement of the instant disciplinary action on the same ground as the stated "reason for the dismissal of the commencement of the disciplinary action" (hereinafter referred to as "decision to dismiss the president of the Defense Association").

C. On February 13, 2015, the chief prosecutor filed an objection (No. 2015 - 2 of the objection and No. 2015 - 3 of the objection) with the Korean Bar Association Disciplinary Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Korean Bar Association Disciplinary Committee”) on February 13, 2015. On March 30, 2015, the Korean Bar Association Disciplinary Committee dismissed each of the above objections (hereinafter referred to as “decision to dismiss the objection”).

D. On May 11, 2015, the chief prosecutor filed an objection against the Defendant. On July 2, 2015, the Defendant revoked the decision to dismiss the instant objection and rendered the instant decision to commence disciplinary proceedings against the Plaintiffs.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 9, Eul evidence 1 to 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Related statutes;

Attached Form 3 is as shown in the relevant statutes.

3. Whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate

A. Whether a certain act of an administrative agency can be a subject of appeal cannot be determined abstractly and generally. In light of the law enforcement with regard to a specific fact by an administrative agency as a public authority, in mind, whether the administrative agency affects the rights and obligations of the people, it must be determined individually by taking into account the content and purport of the relevant Act and subordinate statutes, the subject, content, form, and procedure of the act, the substantial relation between the act and the disadvantage suffered by interested parties, such as the other party, and the pertinent administrative principle, and the attitude of the administrative agency and interested parties related to the pertinent act. If a certain act of the administrative agency has the appearance such as an administrative disposition that gives objectively disadvantage to the people without any legal basis, and if the other party to the act is aware of it as an administrative disposition, it is necessary to take measures to eliminate the disadvantage or apprehension of the people derived from the act of the administrative agency, whether the other party suffers from disadvantage or apprehension should also be determined by taking into account the attitude of the relevant administrative agency related to the pertinent act as well as the legal administration principles at the time (see Supreme Court Decision 200Nu1427. 17.

B. According to the above facts, the decision of this case is to revoke the decision of dismissal as to the commencement of disciplinary action and commence disciplinary proceedings. It is consistent with the interim decision for the decision of disciplinary action after the later deliberation. However, the decision of this case not only affected the rights and duties of the plaintiffs, such as the commencement of disciplinary proceedings against the plaintiffs, the date of deliberation is designated and proceeding, but also deemed that the plaintiffs can be recognized as administrative disposition. Thus, it is reasonable to view the decision of this case as an exercise of public authority or an equivalent administrative action, which is subject to appeal litigation. On other premise, prior defenses by the defendant cannot be accepted.

4. Effect of the decision of this case

A. The Attorney-at-Law Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") separates the right to start disciplinary action and the right to decide on disciplinary action from the right to decide on disciplinary action upon request for the commencement of disciplinary action by the Director-at-law disciplinary committee.

A disciplinary procedure shall begin upon the request of the president of the National Association (Article 97 of the Act). The chief prosecutor, the head of a local bar association (hereinafter referred to as the "local president"), the chairperson of the legal professional ethics council may request the president of the National Association to commence disciplinary action (Articles 89-4(4) and 97-2 of the Act), the client, etc. may file a petition for commencement of disciplinary action with the director of the local council, or re-petition with the chief of the National Association when the period of application expires.

The president of the Defense Association shall determine whether a request for the commencement of disciplinary action has been made or re-requested for the commencement of disciplinary action, and may conduct an investigation by the Investigation Committee if necessary to determine whether a request for the commencement of disciplinary action has been made (Article 97-4 of the Act). The Act explicitly provides that the title of a request for the commencement of disciplinary proceedings has different text such as a request, a request, a petition, etc., and the head of the Change Association. The president of the Change Association

On the other hand, the Attorney Disciplinary Committee is respectively established in the Korean Bar Association and the Ministry of Justice (Article 92 of the Act).

If the president of the Korean Bar Association accepts ex officio or a petition or re-petition and makes a request for disciplinary action, the disciplinary procedure shall commence. First of all, the Korean Bar Association Disciplinary Committee shall deliberate on a disciplinary case corresponding to a disciplinary cause under Article 91 of the Act and make a decision on disciplinary action (Article 95 of the Act). (Article 98-4 of the Act) The defendant shall deliberate and decide on a case of objection against a disciplinary decision made by the Korean Bar Association Disciplinary Committee (Articles 96 and 100 (2) of the Act), and the law provides that the defendant shall deliberate on a case of objection against "the decision made by

However, an applicant for the commencement of disciplinary action, including the chief prosecutor, may file an objection with the bar association disciplinary committee (Article 97-5(1) of the Act), if the chief of the Defense Association makes a decision to dismiss the application for the commencement of disciplinary action or fails to make a decision as to whether the application for the commencement of disciplinary action is filed within three months. This is a means of objection to the exercise or non-exercise of the right to request the commencement of disciplinary action by the chief of the Defense Association (Article 97-5(1) of the Act). The bar association disciplinary committee has commenced disciplinary proceedings if the objection is well-grounded, but shall make a decision of rejection unless there is good reason (Article 97-5(2) of the Act). In this case, the subject of review will be the legitimacy of exercising

B. In light of the following circumstances, the law does not seem to stipulate that any objection as to whether to exercise the right to request the commencement of disciplinary action against the president of the National Bar Association shall be limited to deciding whether to accept it by the bar association disciplinary committee which filed an objection with the bar association disciplinary committee, and further to allow the defendant to be dissatisfied with the defendant. As seen earlier, the right to request the commencement of disciplinary action against the president of the National Bar Association, the compromise with the right to request the commencement of disciplinary action against the president of the National Bar Association, and the deliberation of disciplinary action against the Ministry of Justice and voting rights

Articles 98 through 98-3 of the Act provide that the period of disciplinary decision of the bar association disciplinary committee (excluding Article 98 (2) below), the right to attend and state opinions of disciplinary suspects, the grounds for exclusion of disciplinary committee members shall be determined, and Article 198-4 of the Act provides that disciplinary decision of the bar association disciplinary committee shall be set, the quorum of disciplinary decision, notification of disciplinary decision and the time of entry into force of disciplinary decision, and Article 98-5 and Article 99 of the Act provide that the procedures and requirements for disciplinary decision shall be set after the commencement of disciplinary decision (Article 98 (2) of the Act provides that matters concerning the defendant shall be regulated after the commencement of disciplinary decision (Article 98 (1) of the Act). Since the subject of examination by the bar association disciplinary committee is 90 of the Act, it is hard to say that the defendant's disciplinary decision is subject to disciplinary decision of the bar association disciplinary committee's decision of disciplinary action which is 'the grounds for disciplinary action' as stated in Article 90 (1) of the Act.

Meanwhile, as the former Attorney-at-Law was amended by Act No. 8271 on January 26, 2007, the president of the National Bar Association shall decide whether to request the commencement of disciplinary action against the chief prosecutor, etc. (Article 97-4); the chief of the National Bar Association may file an objection against a decision of rejection of a request for the commencement of disciplinary action against the chief of the National Bar Association; the chief of the National Bar Association may file an objection against a decision of rejection of a request for the commencement of disciplinary action against the chief of the National Bar Association; and the chief of the National Bar Association established a new provision (Article 97-5) to dismiss an objection without any justifiable reason; and it seems to have prepared a procedure for objection against the non-exercise of a request for disciplinary action against the chief of the National Bar Association within the scope of such new provision. Article 100 of the Act, which provides that the chief of the National Bar Association shall be dissatisfied with the decision of disciplinary action against the chief of the National Bar Association under Article 91 of the Act, without amendment of the language.

On the other hand, if the defendant revoked his decision on dismissal of the objection by the bar association disciplinary committee, and the decision on disciplinary action can be made by starting the disciplinary procedure, a discipline accused person is not guaranteed the right to participate in the procedure such as making a statement at the bar association disciplinary committee and his status to receive the decision on disciplinary action including the decision on disciplinary grounds of the bar association disciplinary committee. Thus, a disciplinary action against a discipline accused person who has the bar association disciplinary committee's right is placed at a disadvantage compared to the case where a disciplinary action is commenced according to a request for opening a disciplinary action by the president of the association or a acceptance of a request for commencing a

C. In a case where the Defendant did not allow an objection to the decision on dismissal of the instant objection, the Defendant asserts to the purport that it is unfair since the Defendant did not control the failure to start disciplinary action in the form of a 'fashion of the appearance'. However, it is difficult to accept in light of the fact that the bar association disciplinary committee consists of two judges, two public prosecutors, three attorneys, and one person with legal experience and a good reputation, who is not a lawyer.

In addition, there are similar aspects as the result of the decision to dismiss the objection in this case and the decision of non-guilty suspicion after the commencement of the disciplinary action, but the former means that there is no suspicion to the extent that the commencement of the disciplinary action could not be avoided, and the latter means that it is difficult to recognize a suspicion as a result of the deliberation of the disciplinary action although there was a suspicion for the commencement of the disciplinary action, and there is a difference in the conclusion that the disciplinary action was once commenced and the deliberation of the disciplinary action was conducted as a discipline accused person. Therefore, it is difficult to deem that allowing the applicant to object to the commencement of the disciplinary action to the latter is unreasonable.

D. Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the decision of this case was issued on matters not subject to the defendant's deliberation and resolution, and it is not effective. Since the plaintiff's primary claim is reasonable, the plaintiff's primary claim does not proceed further to the conjunctive claim.

5. Conclusion

The plaintiff's primary claim is accepted.

Judges Kim Young-young

Judges Maap-man

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.