[행정처분취소][집10(1)행,033]
Whether authorization which has been bound by the supervisory authority of the competent authority on the juristic person pursuant to the provisions of the articles of incorporation of a nonprofit juristic person or whether the cancellation of authorization is an administrative disposition
The acts of authorization by the competent authority for the appointment of directors and auditors of a foundation corporation or the acts of cancellation of such authorization are all administrative dispositions.
Article 32 of the Civil Act; Article 37 of the Civil Act; Article 40 of the Civil Act; Article 43 of the Civil Act
Lee Gyeong-gi et al.
Minister of Delivery
Seoul High Court Decision 59Da39 delivered on May 8, 1959
The original judgment shall be reversed.
The case shall be remanded to Seoul High Court.
The grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs' attorney are as shown in the attached Form of the Reasons for Appeal.
According to Article 32 of the Civil Act, the first issue of appeal is that the competent administrative agency should permit the establishment of a non-profit corporation foundation or foundation. According to Article 45 (3) and Article 42 (2) of the Civil Act, an amendment to the articles of incorporation of a foundation shall not take effect without obtaining permission from the competent administrative agency. According to Article 43 (40) 5 of the Civil Act, the competent administrative agency shall examine the provisions on appointment and dismissal of directors of a non-profit foundation and decide whether to permit the establishment or change of the articles of incorporation of the foundation. Thus, it is reasonable to consider that the appointment and dismissal of directors of the foundation is an act of issuing the articles of incorporation of the foundation without obtaining approval from the competent administrative agency, and it is reasonable to consider that the appointment and dismissal of directors of the foundation is an act of issuing the articles of incorporation of the foundation without obtaining approval from the competent administrative agency, even if there is a provision that the appointment and dismissal of directors of the foundation requires approval from the competent administrative agency for the appointment and dismissal of directors of the foundation. Thus, it is also reasonable to interpret that the plaintiffs's appointment and dismissal of directors of the foundation.
Nevertheless, the court below's decision which dismissed the lawsuit on the ground that the act of appointing directors and directors is a juristic act under private law, and the authorization or revocation thereof is not subject to administrative litigation as also a legal act under private law, is erroneous in understanding the legal nature of the authorization act of the competent authority for the officers of the foundation. Therefore, it is reasonable
Therefore, without examining the judgment on the second ground of appeal, the original judgment shall be reversed, and the original judgment shall be tried again by the court below, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
The two judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Ma-won Na-won