2011Nu1220 Revocation of revocation of recognition of bankruptcy, etc.

A

Gwangju Regional Employment and Labor Office

Gwangju District Court Decision 201Guhap570 Decided June 23, 2011

November 10, 201

November 24, 2011

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Purport of claim

The defendant's rejection disposition, including bankruptcy, against the plaintiff on April 16, 2010, is revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Details of the disposition;

○ The Plaintiff was employed as a member of the farming association corporation B on July 1, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant company”) and was employed on January 8, 2010, but did not receive wages and retirement allowances from the instant company after September 2009.

○ On March 16, 2010, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for fact-finding, such as bankruptcy, on the ground that the business activities of the instant company were suspended, there is no prospect to resume the business, and there is no ability to pay wages, retirement allowances, etc.

○ However, on April 16, 2010, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition rejecting the Plaintiff’s application for fact-finding, such as bankruptcy, on the ground that: (a) the instant company did not report the closure of its business; (b) the instant company did not report the closure of its business; and (c) C, which engages in livestock feed manufacturing and selling business, is in operation in the instant company’s signboard, which is the same type of business; and (d) the employees of the two businesses can be deemed the same place of business;

○ The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on May 6, 2010, but the said commission dismissed it on October 26, 2010, and the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on February 16, 201.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 2, 9, 10 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

The defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful since the plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case after the lapse of 90 days from November 3, 2010 even though the ruling of the Central Administrative Appeals Commission was legally served on November 3, 2010.

Therefore, a litigation for cancellation shall be instituted within 90 days from the date on which the original copy of a written ruling is served (Article 20(1) of the Administrative Litigation Act), and in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as to the statement of No. 1 and witness witness D’s testimony on November 3, 2010, when the original written ruling of the Central Administrative Appeals Commission was served to North-gu, Gwangju Metropolitan City, where the plaintiff’s domicile is the plaintiff’s spouse, and D received it, and D received it to the plaintiff only on the day of receipt of the said written ruling. Since it is apparent that the lawsuit of this case was filed on February 16, 201, which was 90 days after the lapse of 90 days thereafter, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as the period of filing the lawsuit of this case expires.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed in an unlawful manner, and the judgment of the court of first instance shall be dismissed in a different conclusion, and it shall be revoked, and it shall be so decided as per Disposition with the decision to dismiss the lawsuit of this case.

The presiding judge, senior judge and assistant judge

Judges Cho Jong-hee

Judgment of the Prosecutor