The nature of the measure of approval for withdrawal of members of the National Occupational Rehabilitation Institute;

The withdrawal of a member from the National Vocational Rehabilitation Institute shall take effect upon the submission of a written withdrawal to the Cooperative, and the approval of the director of the Vocational Rehabilitation Institute shall be limited to the confirmation of facts and shall not be deemed an administrative disposition that determines

Article 17 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act, Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Dried iron

The Director of the National Vocational Rehabilitation Institute

All of the plaintiff's lawsuits are dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The administrative disposition that the defendant approved the withdrawal of the member of the Korea Vocational Rehabilitation Institute Seoul District Association against the plaintiff on May 9, 1972 shall be revoked.

On March 6, 1972, the defendant confirmed that the defendant approved the plaintiff as a member of the Seoul Branch of the Forestry Cooperatives for Vocational Rehabilitation.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant.

On March 6, 1972, under the Vocational Rehabilitation Act, the plaintiff was a person eligible for assistance, and the defendant applied for membership of the National Vocational Rehabilitation Institute Seoul Branch of the National Vocational Rehabilitation Institute on March 6, 1972, and the defendant approved the fact that the plaintiff became a member of the union. Thus, the plaintiff submitted to the union a forged plaintiff's withdrawal letter on May 9, 1972, although the plaintiff did not have any fact that he left the union, and the defendant issued an administrative disposition that approved the withdrawal of the above member of the union on May 9, 1972 upon the above invalid document, but the above withdrawal letter was illegal, so the defendant's withdrawal approval disposition was revoked. The plaintiff's withdrawal letter was unlawful since the plaintiff failed to meet the requirements of the Sub-committee and the period of filing administrative litigation was illegal, and the plaintiff submitted a written withdrawal to the plaintiff, and thus, the plaintiff did not affect the defendant's withdrawal letter since it did not affect the validity of the withdrawal letter.

Article 17 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act shall be established as a settlement vocational rehabilitation association in order to promote the vocational rehabilitation and economic self-reliance of a person subject to this Act as a person subject to this Act.

Article 23 of the Enforcement Decree of the former Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that "the establishment, management, dissolution, and other necessary matters of a cooperative shall be determined by the Presidential Decree," and Article 23 of the same Act provides that a person who wishes to join a cooperative shall submit an application for joining the cooperative with a project plan attached thereto and obtain approval from the head of the National Vocational Rehabilitation Center, and Article 24 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that a member shall withdraw from the cooperative when he/she withdraws from the cooperative." Thus, upon being aware of the above provisions, a member's admission and expulsion shall be an effective requirement for the approval from the head of the Vocational Rehabilitation Center. However, since a member's withdrawal from the cooperative submits a written withdrawal from the cooperative, it is not required to obtain the approval from the head of the Vocational Rehabilitation Center, and it shows that the withdrawal from the cooperative takes effect after adding witness's testimony on April 29, 1972, the plaintiff's withdrawal from the cooperative was submitted to the defendant through the above letter of approval of the plaintiff's withdrawal from the cooperative.

If so, the plaintiff submitted the above withdrawal letter to the above wooden Cooperative on April 29, 1972, and thus the effect of withdrawal occurred, and thus, the plaintiff lost its status as a member. Since approval of the above withdrawal letter is merely a confirmation that the plaintiff's withdrawal letter was submitted to the Cooperative and withdrawn from the Cooperative, and it cannot be viewed as an administrative disposition that causes the plaintiff to withdraw from the Cooperative, it cannot be viewed as an administrative disposition that causes the plaintiff to withdraw from the Cooperative, and thus, the plaintiff's claim for cancellation based on the defendant's approval of withdrawal cannot be seen as an administrative disposition that causes the plaintiff to withdraw from the Cooperative is ultimately an administrative disposition that does

Next, the health team for the plaintiff's claim for confirmation, and the fact that the plaintiff was a member of the plaintiff's membership according to lawful procedures is not disputed by the defendant, and the plaintiff has no interest in confirmation as long as he loses his membership through withdrawal ( even if the purport of the claim for confirmation is the fact that the plaintiff is currently a member of the union, it is without merit because it is based on the facts found earlier).

3. If so, the plaintiff's main claim is dismissed, and the lawsuit costs are assessed against the losing plaintiff. It is so decided as per Disposition, since the plaintiff's claim of the main claim is dismissed without any need to review the legality of the elements of the main claim.

Judges Shin Jong-chul (Presiding Judge)