2. The applicant's request is dismissed.

3. The total cost of the application shall be borne by the applicant;

1. Purport of request;

The dismissal of a respondent made on December 5, 2008 to the applicant on December 5, 2008 shall suspend its effect until the Seoul Administrative Court 2008Guhap49513 case becomes final and conclusive.

2. Purport of appeal;

The same shall apply to the order.

According to the records of this case, the following facts are substantiated.

A. The applicant is a person appointed by the respondent from September 7, 2007 to September 6, 2010 as the chairperson of the Arts Council Korea (hereinafter “instant committee”), and the respondent is the head of the competent agency of the instant committee.

B. From November 26, 2008 to December 1, 2008, the respondent conducted a special investigation with respect to the instant commission. On December 5, 2008, the Respondent notified the instant commission of the details of the said special investigation and notified the applicant of the measure accordingly, and on the same day, dismissed the instant disposition of dismissal that the applicant is exempted from the position of the chairperson of the instant commission. On December 5, 2008, the Respondent appointed the Nonparty as the applicant’s acting representative, but on February 12, 2009, appointed the said Nonparty as the succeeding chairperson of the instant commission.

C. On December 17, 2008, the applicant filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of the instant dismissal disposition with the Seoul Administrative Court (Seoul Administrative Court 2008Guhap49513), and received a partial winning judgment from the above court on December 16, 2009 on the grounds that the instant dismissal disposition was unlawful, and the respondent filed an appeal with this court. On January 18, 2010, the applicant filed the instant application with the Seoul Administrative Court seeking suspension of validity of the instant dismissal disposition.

D. On December 16, 2008, after the instant dismissal, the applicant was reinstated as a professor of the official university on December 16, 2008, and was temporarily dismissed on February 2, 2010.

E. The instant committee is an incorporated foundation established for the purpose of the promotion of culture and arts pursuant to Article 20 of the Culture and Arts Promotion Act to deliberate and resolve matters concerning the establishment, modification, and enforcement of basic plans, etc. to support the projects and activities for the promotion of culture and arts (Article 30(1) of the Culture and Arts Promotion Act). The instant committee’s chairperson represents the instant committee and exercise overall control over its affairs (Article 24(3) of the Culture and Arts Promotion Act)

2. Determination

A. In principle, even if a lawsuit seeking the revocation or invalidity of an administrative disposition is filed by asserting that the administrative disposition is illegal or invalid, the validity or enforcement of the administrative disposition is not affected (Article 23(1) and Article 38(1) of the Administrative Litigation Act): Provided, That Article 23(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act provides that the court may suspend the validity of the disposition only in cases where an urgent need exists to prevent irrecoverable damage that may arise from the disposition. Here, whether there exists “emergency necessity to prevent irrecoverable damage that may arise from the disposition” should be determined specifically and individually by comprehensively taking into account the nature, form and content of the disposition in question, the nature, content and degree of the damage suffered by the other party to the disposition, the method and degree of the other party to the disposition’s winning of the claim on the merits, the degree of the possibility of winning the claim on the merits (see Supreme Court Order 2008Da107, Dec. 29, 2008).

B. In full view of all the circumstances, including the progress and nature of the dismissal disposition of this case based on the above facts, the nature, content and degree of damage caused by the applicant who is the counter-party to the disposition, the method of restitution and monetary compensation that can be presented as remedy other than the suspension of validity in this case, and the method and difficulty of the applicant after the dismissal disposition of this case, the committee of this case appointed the applicant's successor, and the new chairperson after February 12, 2009. If the dismissal disposition of this case is suspended, the applicant is deemed to have a serious effect on public welfare as it is difficult to secure predictability and legal stability in the internal and external legal relations of the committee of this case, and as a result, the committee of this case could not smoothly carry out the purpose business of this case.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the application of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the decision of the court of first instance is unfair, so it is revoked and the application of the applicant is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges, equipment (Presiding Judge)