[국회의특별위원회결의부존재및본회의결의무효확인청구사건][고집1966특,448]
Whether the resolution of the National Assembly is subject to the adjudication of the court.
The resolution of the Special Committee and the plenary session of the National Assembly of the National Assembly is a meeting of the National Assembly which has been finally handled under its high autonomy and autonomy given by the National Assembly, and such a act is not subject to the judgment of the court, even though it is possible to judge the invalidity by legal action.
Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act
Plaintiff 1 and eight others
Intervenor 1 and 7 others
National Assembly
The plaintiffs' lawsuits are dismissed.
Of the litigation costs, those arising from the participation shall be borne by each of the supplementary intervenors of the plaintiffs, and the others shall be borne by the plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs' legal representative confirms that the absence of the resolution of the Special Committee of the National Assembly on August 11, 1965 between Japan and the Republic of Korea on the attached documents and the consent to ratification of the Agreement and its attached documents between Japan and the Republic of Korea, and that the resolution of the 12th plenary session on August 14, 1965 is null and void.
The court costs are assessed against the defendant.
The consent to ratification of the relevant treaties, agreements, and documents attached thereto, which were submitted to the National Assembly on July 12, 1965, shall be deemed to have been resolved at the Special Committee of the National Assembly on August 52, 1965, which was presented to the 12th plenary session of the defendant National Assembly on August 14, 1965, and the fact that the consent to ratification was delivered to the Government on August 14, 1965 is not disputed between the parties.
(1) The plaintiffs (1) agreed to the resolution of the special committee of the National Assembly by the chairman of the National Assembly without the consent of only 28 members of the National Assembly without the consent of the chairman of the National Assembly by the non-party 1 and 28 members of the National Assembly without the consent of the chairman of the National Assembly. The decision was not made because the chairman declared that the non-existence of the special committee was passed. (2) since the members of the National Assembly submitted a letter of resignation to the National Assembly and presented it to the National Assembly only for the party, it is null and void in violation of Article 7 (1) of the Constitution. Thus, the non-existence of the resolution of the special committee and the resolution of the plenary session of the National Assembly should be confirmed as invalid, since each resolution of the special committee of the National Assembly and the plenary session of the National Assembly by the chairman of the National Assembly were one of the highest agencies of the government, and the decision of the National Assembly is final and conclusive under the autonomy and autonomy granted by the National Assembly to promote the smooth operation and progress of the will.
Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim is dismissed as it is not unlawful because it filed a lawsuit on a matter which cannot be the object of a court's judgment, and it is so decided as per Disposition by applying Article 14 of the Administrative Litigation Act, Articles 89, 93, and 94 of the Civil Procedure Act to the burden of litigation costs.
Judges Kim Do-ju (Presiding Judge)