[1] The standard for determining whether an executor of an administrative act is a condition for cancellation or a burden

[2] The case holding that the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development rules for the establishment, etc. of a principal and a deputy principal certificate issued by the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development set forth the rules for administrative affairs within the administrative agency, and that the assistant officer established by the recognition of the principal

[1] The legal meaning of an omission, omission, acceptance, or payment, in a case where the existence of an omission of an administrative act constitutes a condition for cancellation dependent on the "abstinence of the validity of an administrative act in the future", or in a case where it is disputed whether it constitutes a so-called "liability," which orders the other party to act, omission, acceptance, or payment as an addition to a beneficial administrative act, shall be reasonably determined by taking into account the objective intent of the administrative agency indicated in the disposition, the background and institutional background of the disposition, the relevant statutes based on the disposition, and the administrative purpose

[2] The case holding that the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development rules for the establishment, etc. of a principal and a deputy principal certificate issued by the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development set forth the rules for administrative affairs within the administrative agency, and that the assistant officer established by the recognition of the principal certificate

[1] Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act / [2] Article 21 (1) [Attachment 1] of the former Elementary and Secondary Education Act (amended by Act No. 7120 of Jan. 29, 2004), Article 23 of the former Decree on Qualification Examination for Teachers (amended by Presidential Decree No. 17427 of Dec. 19, 2001)

Plaintiff (Attorney Yoon Sung-chul et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

The superintendent of education of Incheon Metropolitan City

Incheon District Court Decision 2003Guhap2209 Delivered on March 18, 2004

April 6, 2005

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s revocation of recognition of school principal qualification against the Plaintiff on June 16, 2003 shall be revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

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

1. Basic facts

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of all the arguments in Gap evidence 1, 2, and 4 through 6:

A. On September 1, 1999, the Plaintiff was assigned to the first high school of Nonparty 1’s educational foundation, and was subject to the qualification training for assistant principal in the first half of the year 200 and served as the first high school principal acting as an assistant principal acting as a principal on June 24, 200 after obtaining the certificate of qualification for assistant principal from July 1, 200 to June 24, 200. However, on December 31, 2001, the Plaintiff recommended the Defendant to be subject to the qualification training for principal in the name of the above school principal in the name of the above school.

B. Accordingly, on January 22, 2002, the Defendant recognized the Plaintiff as a person eligible for recognition of the principal of a school and issued a secondary school principal qualification certificate from March 22, 2002 to July 30, 2002.

C. Article 21 [Attachment 1] of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and Article 21 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the term “3. Awarding terms” stipulates that the term “the term of “the term of “the term of “the term of “the term of “the term” is stipulated as “the term of “the term of “the term of “the term of “the term of” to

D. After that, the Plaintiff did not appoint the principal of the first high school as the principal of the above first high school on February 2003. From March 1, 2003, the Plaintiff worked as the principal of the second high school operated by Nonparty 2 for one year from March 1, 2003, and retired on February 2004.

E. Accordingly, on June 16, 2003, the defendant notified the plaintiff through the first high school on the ground that the plaintiff was not appointed as the principal of the first high school and the conditions for the award specified in the certificate of qualification for the principal have not been fulfilled (hereinafter referred to as the "notification of the cancellation of qualification").

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The plaintiff

On the premise that the notice of cancellation of the qualification of this case constitutes an administrative disposition that deprives the plaintiff of his principal qualification, the plaintiff asserts that such disposition should be revoked because it violates the principle of excessive prohibition or the principle of protection of trust in comparison with the public interest to be achieved through it and the situation of infringement of the rights and interests suffered by the plaintiff.

B. Defendant

In recognition of the principal qualification for the plaintiff, the defendant set up an additional condition of rescission to be appointed to a school to be appointed within six months from July 30, 2002, which is the date of acquisition of the principal qualification for the plaintiff. Thus, the recognition of the principal of the school against the plaintiff was not made to the school to be appointed by the plaintiff until January 30, 2003, which is six months from the date of acquisition of the qualification. The notification of the cancellation of the qualification of this case is merely an act of mere fact that does not affect the rights and obligations of the plaintiff, and thus, the lawsuit of this case seeking its cancellation is unlawful on the ground that it cannot be subject to appeal litigation.

3. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

(a) Relevant statutes;

Gu Elementary and Secondary Education Act (amended by Act No. 7120 of Jan. 29, 2004)

Article 21 (Qualifications for Teachers) (1) Principals, principals, assistant principals and assistant principals shall meet the qualifications referred to in attached Table 1 and obtain a certificate of qualification examined and granted by the Minister of Education and Human Resources Development under the conditions as prescribed by Presidential Decree.

[Attachment 1] Qualification Standards for Principals, Deputy Principals, Principals, and Assistant Inspectors

2. A person who has a high knowledge and virtue and is recognized by the Minister of Education to meet the standards prescribed by Presidential Decree;

Decree on Qualification Examinations for Teachers (Presidential Decree No. 17115, Jan. 29, 2001)

Article 23 (Recognition of Qualifications for Principals and Principals) (1) The accreditation of principal of a secondary school referred to in subparagraph 2 of the attached Table 1 of the Act, subparagraph 2 of the disturbance of principal of an elementary school, subparagraph 3 of the disturbance of principal of a special school and subparagraph 2 of the disturbance of principal of a kindergarten shall be granted from among those who meet the standards for accreditation of qualifications referred to in attached Table 1 and who are between 32 and 62 years of age.

(2) When the Minister of Education and Human Resources Development recognizes the qualification for principal or director pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1), he/she shall appoint a person to be appointed as a school to be appointed within six months from the date he/she obtains such qualification, and may attach a condition to have him/her serve for a school to be appointed for a period determined by the Minister of Education

[Attachment 1] Criteria for Recognition of Qualifications for Principals

1. A person who is a State public official or local public official of Grade 5 or higher, and has at least five years’ educational experience or educational administration experience, and falls under any of the following subparagraphs:

Regulations on the Establishment, etc. of Assistants' Certificate of Qualification (Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development Directive No. 628, hereinafter referred to as "Rules on the Establishment of Assistants")

Article 2 (Standards for Establishment of Assistants) (1) Any person who has obtained a teacher qualification certificate under the provisions of Article 23 of the Decree (referring to the Decree on the Qualification of Teachers; hereinafter the same shall apply) shall be appointed to a school to be selected within six months from the date on which he/she is awarded the teacher qualification certificate.

(2) A person who has obtained a certificate of qualification as principal in addition to the conditions referred to in paragraph (1) shall continue to work for a period prescribed in attached Table 1 at a school to be appointed according to his/her qualification and career: Provided, That the following persons shall be awarded a certificate of qualification without any conditions of continuous work:

Article 8 (Cancellation of Recognition of Qualifications) (1) If a person fails to meet the conditions for granting the qualification certificate prescribed in Article 23 (2) of the Decree, or if any reason arises which makes it impossible to fulfill such conditions, the recognition of qualifications shall be revoked: Provided, That in any of the following cases, the revocation of recognition of qualifications may be postponed for such period:

(b) Markets:

The issue of whether the notice of cancellation of qualification in this case can be an independent administrative disposition against the plaintiff, which is subject to an appeal litigation, depends on whether the defendant's father's father's "to be appointed to the Japanese Information High School within six months" established by the defendant, who recognized the principal's qualification to the plaintiff as the principal on July 30, 202, constitutes the conditions of cancellation. Thus, it is first examined.

(1) With respect to the denial of an administrative act, the legal meaning should be determined reasonably by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances and institutional background of the administrative act, relevant laws and regulations, and administrative purpose to be achieved by the administrative agency, focusing on the objective intent of the administrative agency indicated in the disposition, in cases where there is a dispute as to whether the validity of the administrative act constitutes a cancellation condition that depends on the ‘abstinence of the administrative act', or whether the act, omission, acceptance, or payment is an incidental to a beneficial administrative act, and whether the act, omission, acceptance, or payment should be followed by the separate measures (e.g., withdrawal, cancellation, etc. of the administrative act) of the administrative agency with respect to the non-performance of the duty (the "child burden" in this regard).

(2) The Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development’s provision on the establishment of a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a subsequent provision on the appointment of a principal for the purpose of establishing a separate provision on the appointment of a principal and a separate provision on the appointment of a principal.

(3) Thus, the plaintiff's notification of cancellation of qualification is an administrative disposition that causes changes in the plaintiff's legal relationship, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the notification of cancellation of qualification is subject to an appeal litigation, since the conditions of cancellation added to the recognition of qualification for the principal of the school on July 30, 202 were fulfilled.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is dismissed as it is unlawful, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, so it is revoked and it is decided to dismiss the lawsuit of this case as per Disposition.

Judges' profit-based (Presiding Judge) Lee Jae-won