[하천부지점용허가취소처분취소청구사건][고집1973특,363]
Whether there is a benefit to seek revocation of the disposition to cancel the permission for occupation and use in the circumstance of expiration of the period.
Administrative litigation needs to be able to recover the infringed rights or legal interests by cancelling or changing a certain rights or legal interests as an illegal administrative disposition. Since permission for occupation and use of rivers subject to this case has already been completed at the time of closing of argument in this case, there is no benefit to seek revocation of the disposition for cancellation of this case, unless there is a special reason.
Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act
Plaintiff
Do Governor of Chungcheongbuk-do
The plaintiff's lawsuit is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
The plaintiff is revoked the disposition to revoke the permission to occupy and use the river site against the plaintiff on August 12, 1971, No. 2303 of Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Yari 254-2.
The court costs are assessed against the defendant.
Since the period of permission to occupy and use the river site stated in the purport of the claim against the plaintiff is until November 30, 1972, the defendant's main defense is that there is no benefit in the lawsuit, and that the plaintiff's lawsuit should be dismissed.
Administrative litigation, as a requirement for filing a suit, has been infringed by an illegal administrative disposition against a certain right or legal interest, and therefore, it is necessary to recover the infringed rights or legal interest, or to have the benefit of protecting the rights due to the invalidity confirmation, etc.
However, there is no dispute between the parties that the period of permission to occupy and use a river site stated in the purport of the claim against the plaintiff from January 7, 1970 to November 30, 1972, and the period of permission has already expired. Thus, the plaintiff does not have the right to seek revocation of the permission to occupy and use the river site as stated in the ground for special circumstance.
Therefore, the plaintiff's principal lawsuit shall be dismissed without determination as to whether it is unlawful for the plaintiff to have no interest in lawsuit, and the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff as the losing party and it is so decided as per Disposition.
Judges Yong-Ank, Myun (Presiding Judge)