(심리불속행) 행정처분이 뒤에 항고소송에서 취소되었더라도 그 자체만으로 그 처분이 공무원의 불법행위를 구성한다고 단정할 수 없음[국승]
Seoul High Court-2015-Na2036981 (Law No. 1698)
(A) Even if an administrative disposition was revoked in an appeal litigation subsequent to the administrative disposition, it cannot be readily concluded that the disposition alone constitutes a tort committed by a public official.
(C) In the event that an administrative agency’s act of performing its duties is unlawful before the establishment of the interpretation of the relevant statute, and thus, it was difficult to expect to an average public official in good faith to faithfully perform the same treatment method at the time of the disposition, barring any special circumstance, it cannot be deemed that such act was due to a public official’s negligence, barring any special circumstance.
Article 19 (Scope of Deductible Expenses)
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
All of the judgment below and the appellate brief examined the records of this case, but the appellant's grounds of appeal are not included in the grounds provided by each subparagraph of Article 4 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal, or are recognized to be groundless. Thus, the appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of