Whether the claim for revocation of an administrative disposition is naturally included in the claim for nullification confirmation

Claim to nullify the invalidity of an administrative disposition includes, as a matter of course, the revocation claim

Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Song Jination

The Director General of Seoul Government

Kim Jin Kim

Seoul High Court Decision 61Na186 delivered on September 8, 1962

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are as shown in the attached Table. The grounds of appeal are examined.

In this case, the Supreme Court has maintained the previous precedents that held that even if an administrative agency, which has the right to manage the property devolving upon the original property, concluded a lease contract with a third party without cancelling the lease contract, the administrative agency has the right to lease the property devolving upon the third party, so even if the lease contract was concluded twice, even though the administrative agency has the right to lease the property devolving upon the original property, it cannot be deemed null and void as a matter of course due to a significant and obvious defect. In this case, the plaintiff has been asserting that the disposition is null and void as a matter of course, and the claim for nullification of the administrative disposition is not legitimate. Since the court below's claim for revocation is unlawful and without merit, the part of the claim for nullification of the administrative disposition is without merit and without merit, so the court below's dismissal of the plaintiff's claim against the original court should be dismissed, and the judgment dismissing the lawsuit is not erroneous or unreasonable, and it cannot be viewed that the dual disposition of the property devolving upon the original judgment is not null and void as a matter of course.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

The judge of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) of the Red Madern (Presiding Judge) Madern Madern Madern Madern Madon