[행정처분취소][집2(7)행,008]
(a) Subjects of the petition deliberation council and administrative litigation;
B. The defendant's wrong designation and the exercise of the right to name
A. The petition council on the property devolving upon the State is a decision ordering a correction or modification of the disposition of the authorities concerned by the petition of the petitioner. The judgment alone cannot be deemed to infringe the rights and interests of the petitioner, and it shall not be deemed to infringe the rights and interests of the relevant administrative agency when the relevant administrative agency made a disadvantageous disposition to the petitioner by the ruling. Thus, the petition council on the property devolving upon the State shall not be qualified as the defendant under the Administrative Litigation Act in light of its function.
B. As in the Administrative Litigation Act, since the purport of a lawsuit and the defendant can be changed, the court below should exercise the right of explanation and have the plaintiff go through legitimate litigation without taking necessary measures to have the plaintiff go through legitimate litigation by correcting the defendant, and the judgment dismissing the plaintiff's lawsuit shall not be exempted as illegal.
Articles 3 and 6 (1) of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 10 of the Regulations on Petitions for Property Belonging to Jurisdiction
Gangwon-do et al. (Attorneys Choi Jin-jin et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)
Deliberative Council on Appeal on Asset Reversion
Seoul High Court Decision 54Do71 delivered on August 18, 1954
We reverse the original judgment.
The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.
[Judgment of the court below]
(A) Although the original judgment was a non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 4's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 4's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 4's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 4's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 4's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 4's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 4's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 4's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 2's.
In order to avoid the infringement of rights and interests by an administrative action against the legitimacy of this case, the administrative agency which infringed the rights and interests shall file an action for correction of the disposition with the defendant under Article 3 of the Administrative Litigation Act is merely a decision ordering correction or modification by the petitioner's appeal against the disposition on the property belonging to the administrative agency. The approval alone does not constitute infringement of the petitioner's rights and interests, and it does not constitute infringement of the petitioner's rights and interests when the relevant administrative agency takes a disposition disadvantageous to the petitioner by a ruling. Thus, the petition council on the property belonging to the court cannot be deemed to be the defendant under the Administrative Litigation Act in light of its function, since it cannot be deemed to be an unlawful lawsuit against the defendant. Accordingly, according to the records, the plaintiff's right to lease was infringed and the plaintiff can be deemed to be excluded from the administrative litigation, and the court below's decision should be reversed and remanded to the court below for correction and correction of the defendant's right to request a new trial under Article 4 of the Civil Procedure Act, regardless of its purport and purport.
Justices Kim Byung-ro (Presiding Justice)