[1] Whether the Gu's guidelines for handling local public officials' remuneration duties, etc. are effective as a legal order (affirmative)

[2] The meaning of "the corresponding career experience" among the part concerning the calculation of the salary class of private service experience under the former Guidelines for Handling the Remuneration of Local Public Officials, etc. [Attachment 1] and the method of determining whether it constitutes such part

[1] Article 45(1) of the Local Public Officials Act and Articles 8(2) and 9-2(2) [Attachment 3] of the former Local Public Officials Remuneration Regulations (amended by Presidential Decree No. 25751, Nov. 19, 2014; Presidential Decree No. 25751, Nov. 19, 2014; Presidential Decree No. 25751, Feb. 19, 2014; Presidential Decree No. 25751, Feb. 2005; Presidential Decree No. 25750, Nov. 19, 2014; Presidential Decree No. 20135, Feb. 19, 2014; Presidential Decree No. 20130, Feb. 23, 2014; Presidential Decree No. 20130, Feb. 3, 2015>

[2] Considering that the former Local Public Officials Act (amended by Act No. 12844, Nov. 19, 2014; hereinafter the same), Article 27(1) and the main sentence of Article 27(2) of the former Local Public Officials Act, guidelines for the management of local public officials’ remuneration affairs, etc. (amended by Presidential Decree No. 104, Aug. 8, 2014; hereinafter “Guideline”) provides that the guidelines for the acquisition of career experience (type 1) in the same specialized field after acquiring qualification certificates, license certificates, and doctor’s degree (hereinafter “qualification”) can be considered in defining the number of career experience (type 2), regardless of whether the requirements for career experience were met in the examination for the appointment of public officials, and that it is difficult to determine the number of career experience experience (type 2) in the process of defining the number of career experience experience of public officials without qualification under Article 27(2)3 of the Local Public Officials Act, etc., the purpose of such guidelines is to comprehensively consider the relevant type of work experience that is not recognized in the relevant type of work experience.

[1] Article 45(1) of the former Local Public Officials Act (Amended by Act No. 12844, Nov. 19, 2014); Articles 8(2) and 9-2 of the former Regulations on Remuneration of Local Public Officials (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 25751, Nov. 19, 2014); [Attachment Table 1] and [Attachment Table 3] / [2] Articles 27(1), (2), and 45(1) of the former Local Public Officials Act (Amended by Act No. 12844, Nov. 19, 2014); Articles 8(2), 9-2, and 9-3 of the former Regulations on Remuneration of Local Public Officials (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 25751, Nov. 19, 2014); [Attachment Table 3]

Plaintiff 1 and one other (Law Firm Newro, Attorneys Yoon-gu et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Do Governor of Chungcheongnam-Nam (Law Firm, Attorneys Kim Young-chul et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Daejeon High Court Decision 2015Nu1009 decided September 17, 2015

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Daejeon High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 45(1) of the former Local Public Officials Act (amended by Act No. 12844, Nov. 19, 2014; hereinafter the same shall apply) provides that matters concerning the salary, salary grade, and raise in the salary of public officials shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree. According to the delegation, Article 8(2) of the former Regulations on Remuneration of Local Public Officials (amended by Presidential Decree No. 25751, Nov. 19, 2014; hereinafter referred to as the “instant Remuneration Regulations”) provides that the beginning salary grade of public officials shall be defined by “the beginning salary grade of public officials” in [Attachment Table 1]. Article 9-2 provides that where a career experience is reflected in defining the beginning salary grade of public officials pursuant to Article 8(2) of the former Local Public Officials Act, the person with the authority to define the beginning salary grade of public officials may inquire into an administrative agency, public institution, organization, private enterprise, etc. related to the relevant career, etc. into the same career grade of public officials, and detailed matters concerning the operation of public officials [Attachment 1].

Meanwhile, Article 9-2(2) and attached Table 3 of the instant Remuneration Regulations provides that the former guidelines for the management of local public officials’ remuneration duties, etc. (amended by Presidential Decree No. 104, Aug. 8, 2014; hereinafter “instant guidelines”) pursuant to delegation by the delegation of Article 9-2(2) and attached Table 3 provides that “the career experience recognized as the career conversion rate for each occupation” refers to “the career experience directly engaged in the same field as that of the job class and position to be appointed and is regularly paid and full-time in the same field as that of the private sector.” In such cases, “the same field” refers to qualification certificates, licenses, and doctor’s degrees (hereinafter “qualification, etc.”) or the career experience without qualification (hereinafter “type 1”), which is recognized as the career experience related to the field of work, such as competitive examination for each occupation (hereinafter “Article 27(2)3 of the Local Public Officials Act”) or the evaluation of each agency’s career experience corresponding thereto.”

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged facts as stated in its holding, and based on the premise that the plaintiffs' private work experience as a public official in research service should be determined according to whether the plaintiffs' private work experience in the same field is a public official in the same field as a public official in the same field after December 31, 1981, as provided in the salary regulations of this case (attached Table 3), without considering the guidelines of this case, when determining whether the plaintiffs' work experience in the same field is included in the calculation of private work experience with respect to the determination of salary grade for the plaintiffs, and based on whether the plaintiffs' private work experience in the same field is appointed as a public official in the same field as the public official in the same field after December 31, 1981. On the ground of the reasons stated in its holding, the court below determined that the plaintiffs' work experience before being appointed as a public official in private sector does not fall under

3. However, it is difficult to accept such a determination by the lower court for the following reasons.

A. First, we examine the external binding force of the instant guidelines.

(1) The so-called administrative rules, which are issued by a superior administrative agency to a subordinate administrative agency on the basis of the standards for the performance of duties or the interpretation and application of statutes, are generally effective only within the administrative organization and do not have external binding force. However, where the provisions of statutes specifically provide for the matters to be the contents of the statutes in the form of administrative rules in which the delegated administrative agency grants the authority to determine the specific matters of the statutes to a specific administrative agency and does not specify the procedure or method of exercising the authority to determine the specific matters of the statutes, such provisions are effective only within the administrative organization, and are not a general effect of administrative rules that do not have external binding power, but rather a general effect of administrative rules that grant the authority to supplement the specific matters of the statutes to an administrative agency, and thus, they have the function to supplement the contents of the statutes by the legal provisions that grant the authority to supplement the specific matters of the statutes, and thus, they have the effect as an external binding order in combination with those of the statutes, etc. (see, e.g.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the part concerning the calculation of the salary class of private service experience, which is prescribed by the theory of the career conversion rate chart by job type, of the instant guideline [Attachment Table 1], shall be determined specifically by the Minister of Government Administration and Home Affairs in the form of administrative rules according to the phased delegation under Article 45(1) of the Local Public Officials Act and Articles 8(2), 9-2(2) and 9-3 of the instant remuneration regulations, and it is difficult to see that the instant guideline conflicts with the contents and purport of the above statutes or goes beyond the limits of delegation. Thus, the instant guideline shall be deemed to have become effective as an external binding legal order in combination with the superior statutes.

Therefore, whether the plaintiffs' private work experience is reflected in the definition of salary grade for the plaintiffs should be determined on the basis of whether the contents of the salary regulations of this case meet the criteria prescribed in the guidelines of this case.

B. Furthermore, this paper examines the interpretation and application of the instant guidelines that should be applied to the Plaintiffs’ inclusion of the Plaintiffs’ private work experience in salary.

(1) Under the instant guideline [Attachment 1], “a person who is engaged directly in the same field as that of the class and class to be appointed and is on full-time basis” refers to “a person who has been engaged in the same field of work as that of the class and class to be appointed” and “the same field of work” refers to a person who has been engaged in the same field of work after acquiring qualification certificate, etc., or who has been engaged without qualification, etc. and has been engaged in the same field of work without qualification, etc., and is recognized as a person having been recognized as a field of work in the relevant field of work in the career competition examination, etc. which requires

In addition, Article 27(1) of the former Local Public Officials Act provides that the principle of appointment of public officials shall be determined as an open competitive examination. Article 27(2) main text of the former Local Public Officials Act provides that public officials may be appointed as an open competitive examination for appointment, such as “where a person holding a certificate of qualification for duties to be assigned is appointed if it is inappropriate to be appointed as an open competitive examination” (Article 27(2)); and in certain cases as “where a person holding a certificate of qualification for duties to be assigned is appointed for a period equivalent to or more than that prescribed by Presidential Decree” (Article 27(3).

(2) In light of the language and text, structure, purport, etc. of the relevant statutes, the instant guidelines provide that, with respect to the career experience (type 1) in the same specialized field after acquiring the qualification certificate, regardless of whether such career experience is required in the relevant public official recruitment examination. On the other hand, with respect to the career experience (type 2), only the career experience recognized as the relevant field of work in the career competition examination, etc. which requires the career experience as a requirement for the relevant field of work, should be considered in defining the salary grade only for the career experience recognized as the relevant field of work. (ii) The purpose of the instant guidelines is that the determination of the salary grade should be made to consider only the career experience recognized as the relevant field of work in the relevant field of work, such as the career competition examination that requires the career experience of the relevant type 2, based on the premise that all the private career experience similar to the class of work experience of the appointed public official should not be considered in defining the salary grade of the relevant public official, it is difficult to consider the relevant type of work experience in the process of appointment.

C. Examining the facts acknowledged by the court below in light of the above legal principles, since the plaintiffs did not acquire the qualification certificate under the guidelines of this case, the plaintiffs' private work experience does not fall under the category 1, which requires work in the same specialized field after acquiring the qualification certificate, and according to the contents of the notice of appointment examination appointed by the plaintiffs, only the academic background requirement of "person who majored in agriculture and chemistry" is required, and it does not constitute the type 2 as it does not specify the appointment requirement. Furthermore, as to whether the plaintiffs' private work experience falls under "the corresponding career" in the guidelines of this case, there are no circumstances suggesting that a substantial examination corresponding to the appointment requirement was conducted during the appointment process of the plaintiffs, and therefore, it is difficult to conclude that the disposition of this case is unlawful.

D. Nevertheless, the lower court, without considering the content of the instant guidelines, determined that the instant refusal disposition was unlawful on the erroneous premise that the Plaintiffs’ private work experience should be considered as a matter of course in defining salary classes, inasmuch as the Plaintiffs were engaged in a full-time job in the same field as the class of position that the Plaintiffs appointed. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the validity, interpretation, and application of the instant guidelines, thereby

4. Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Ko Young-han (Presiding Justice)