beta
Main Issues
Request for revocation of the meaning of declaring the invalidity of an administrative disposition and compliance with the period of filing a lawsuit, etc.
Summary of Judgment
In the sense of declaring the invalidity of an administrative disposition, even in the case of an administrative litigation claiming the revocation, it shall meet the requirements for filing a suit, such as the transfer of a lawsuit and the observance of the period for filing
[Reference Provisions]
Article 2 of the Administrative Litigation Act
Reference Cases
Supreme Court en banc Decision 75Nu128 Decided February 24, 1976
Plaintiff-Appellant
The New Industry Corporation
Defendant-Appellee
Seoul High Court Decision 200Hun-Ga40 delivered on September 1, 200
Judgment of the lower court
Seoul High Court Decision 82Gu503 delivered on January 25, 1983
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
In a case where a lawsuit seeking revocation is filed in the sense of declaring the invalidity of an administrative disposition, it shall meet the requirements for filing the lawsuit, such as the full-time adjudication of the plaintiff and the observance of the period for filing the lawsuit (see Supreme Court Decision 75Nu128, Feb. 24, 1976). Thus, if the lawsuit in this case seeking revocation of the plaintiff's tax disposition is inappropriate for failing to meet the requirements for filing the lawsuit due to the lapse of the period for filing the lawsuit as decided by the court below, such as the theory of lawsuit, even though the purport of seeking revocation is included in the purport of declaring the invalidity of the above taxation disposition among the plaintiff's claims, such as the plaintiff's claim, it shall not be dismissed as an illegal lawsuit that has been filed after the lapse of the period for filing the lawsuit in this case. Accordingly, the court below which rejected
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Jeong Tae-tae (Presiding Justice)