[엘피지충전소허가신청반려처분취소][공1985.4.15.(750),490]
Where any change occurs after filing an application for permission, the criteria for permission to be applied to an administrative disposition;
In principle, administrative disposition should be taken in accordance with the law at the time of disposition, so even if the permission standards set forth in the public notice to specify the permission standards are amended, it is reasonable to deal with according to the permission standards at the time of administrative disposition rather than the permission standards at the time of application for
Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act
Supreme Court Decision 84Nu77 Delivered on May 22, 1984
[Judgment of the court below]
[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 3 others
Daegu High Court Decision 83Gu28 delivered on December 22, 1983
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below dismissed the plaintiff's claim on the ground that administrative disposition should be taken in accordance with the law at the time of disposition as a general principle, so even in the case where the permission criteria set by the Busan City public notice, which embodys the permission standards set by law, as in the case of the amendment of law, should be dealt with in the same manner as in the case of the amendment of law, and the disposition of this case at the time of disposition cannot be deemed unlawful, and it cannot be deemed that it violates the principle of trust and good faith or is not illegal as a deviation or abuse of discretionary power. In light of the records, the above legal and de facto judgment of the court below is identical to the legal and de facto judgment of the court below as stated by the decision of the court below on the ground that the party member reversed the judgment of the court below prior to the remand, and the part of the judgment
If so, it cannot be accepted to criticize the misappropriation of legal and de facto judgment expressed by the above members.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)