위로금등지급신청기각결정취소
1. The part concerning the claim for payment of money in the instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.
3...
1. On April 29, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for payment of consolation money under Article 4 of the Special Act on the Investigation into Force Forced Mobilization and Support for Victims, etc. of Mobilization of Foreign Force Mobilization (hereinafter “Compulsory Mobilization Investigation Act”).
On February 26, 2015, the Defendant: (a) decided that the Plaintiff’s father B was compulsorily mobilized by the Japanese system, and forced the Plaintiff to live in the workplace of Gyeonggi-do from February 1945 to May 3, 1945; (b) but was dead on May 3, 1945, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s application for the payment of the Plaintiff’s consolation benefits pursuant to Article 22 of the Compulsory Mobilization Investigation Act, on the ground that “it does not constitute a victim of forced mobilization in foreign countries
(hereinafter “instant disposition”). On April 15, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for reexamination with the Defendant on the instant disposition, but the Defendant decided that the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination was dismissed pursuant to Article 24 of the Compulsory Mobilization Investigation Act on the ground that “No new fact exists to reverse the original decision” on June 25, 2015.
[Reasons for Recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 7, 8, and 12, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. We examine ex officio determination as to the legitimacy of the part claiming monetary payment in the lawsuit of this case as to the legitimacy of the part claiming monetary payment.
Administrative Litigation Act provides the types of lawsuits that can be filed against the administrative agency.
(See Articles 3 subparag. 1 and 4 of the same Act). Any lawsuit other than the above types of lawsuits shall not be permitted under the current law.
A form of lawsuit seeking the fulfillment of obligations is not defined as a type of lawsuit that can be filed against an administrative agency under the current Administrative Litigation Act.
However, the Plaintiff demanded that the Defendant, an administrative agency, pay KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff.
This action is a form of action seeking the fulfillment of obligations.
Therefore, the above lawsuit is in accordance with the Administrative Litigation Act.