logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.05.21 2019누58751
보험료납부고지처분취소등 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed or added, and thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of

[Supplementary or additional parts] 5. 5. 10. The following shall be added to the following:

In order for an administrative disposition to be null and void as a matter of course, it is insufficient to say that there is an illegal cause, and that the defect is serious and obvious objectively because it violates the important part of the law, and it is necessary to examine the purpose, meaning, function, etc. of the law from a teleological perspective and to reasonably consider the characteristics of the specific case itself.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 94Nu4615 delivered on July 11, 1995, and Supreme Court Decision 2001Du4566 delivered on December 10, 2002, etc.) 6, 6, 10 to 11, “The fact that it is difficult to regard it as a serious defect to the extent that it is null and void” is deemed to be “the fact that a defect violates the important part of the laws and regulations and it is difficult to view it objectively and objectively.”

2. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow