In a case where a person liable for military service who was assigned to a special supplementary service and left the Republic of Korea under the former Military Service Act delays returning to the Republic of Korea without justifiable grounds, but prior to issuance of a notice of payment of a fine for negligence to a guarantor of returning to the Republic of Korea, he/she shall obtain permanent residence and have resided in the country for at least one year,

Article 44 (1) 7 of the former Military Service Act (amended by Act No. 4156 of Dec. 30, 1989) and the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (repealed by Article 2 of the Addenda of the Act No. 4685 of Dec. 31, 1993) provide that persons under obligation to serve in special recruit service shall comply with the provisions of military service statutes unless otherwise expressly provided for in the Act on the Regulation of Special Cases of Military Service. Thus, if persons under obligation to serve in special supplementary service were to be included in the special supplementary service and were deemed to have been included in the special supplementary service under the former Act on the Regulation of Special Cases of Military Service but failed to return to Korea within the original permission period without justifiable grounds, but reside in the country with the right to permanent residence for at least one year prior to the imposition of a fine for negligence on the guarantee of the guarantee of the guarantee of the guarantee of the duty to serve, the period of such obligation shall not be deemed to have accrued for the purpose of returning to Korea without justifiable reasons under Article 134 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Military Service Act.

Article 44(1) of the former Military Service Act (amended by Act No. 4156 of Dec. 30, 1989) (see Article 41 of the current Military Service Act), Article 82 of the former Military Service Act (amended by Act No. 4685 of Dec. 31, 1993) (see Article 94 of the current Act), Article 113(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Military Service Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 14397 of Oct. 6, 1994) (see Article 149(1) of the current Act), Article 3 of the former Regulation on Special Cases of Military Service (repealed by Act No. 4685 of Dec. 31, 193), Article 11(1) of the Addenda, Article 82 of the former Military Service Act (amended by Act No. 14397 of Oct. 14, 194), Article 142 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Military Service Act [General Administrative Litigation Act]

Supreme Court Decision 88Nu4782 Decided April 11, 1989 (Gong1993Sang, 1469) Supreme Court Decision 91Nu3130 Decided January 17, 1992 (Gong1992, 920) Supreme Court Decision 94Nu7713 Decided February 28, 1995 (Gong195Sang, 1486)

Compensation (Law Firm General Law Office, Attorneys Park Won-won et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Seoul Military Manpower Office

Supreme Court Decision 94Nu713 delivered on February 28, 1995

Seoul High Court Decision 95Gu7057 delivered on September 15, 1995

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Although there was no particular defect at the time of the disposition and there was no separate legal ground to revoke the disposition after the disposition, an administrative agency which issued an administrative disposition may revoke the disposition by a separate administrative act that would lose its effect where there was a change in circumstances where the need to continue the original disposition was made, or where there was a need for significant public interest. Thus, the purport of the judgment of remanding the judgment is to revoke the disposition, even though the grounds for delaying the transfer of the special supplemental service personnel to the former Military Service Act, etc. are not prescribed as grounds for revocation of the transfer of the special supplementary service personnel to the former Military Service Act, if a non-Korean student who was transferred to the special supplementary service and was transferred to the special military service did not return to the Republic of Korea without justifiable grounds after having obtained permission for overseas travel pursuant to Article 44(1)7 of the former Military Service Act (amended by Act No. 4156 of Dec. 30, 1989).

However, Article 3 of the Act on the Regulation of Special Cases of Military Service (amended by Act No. 4157, Dec. 30, 1989; hereinafter referred to as the "Regulation of Special Cases of Military Service") provides that if a person under obligation to serve in the special recruit service fails to obtain the right of permanent residence within the Republic of Korea by the amendment of the Military Service Act on December 30, 1989, the special exception system for military service under the former Military Service Act shall be abolished, and instead, if such person was newly established and repealed by Act No. 4157, Dec. 30, 1993, and he did not obtain the right of permanent residence within the Republic of Korea until he returned to Korea without any justifiable reason under the Regulation of Special Cases of Military Service Act (including the right of permanent residence, etc.) and Article 15 of the Enforcement Decree of the amended Act on the Regulation of Special Cases of Military Service Act for the purpose of removing the right of permanent residence from Korea by 15 years before he returned to Korea, the period of permission shall be abolished as prescribed by the amended Act 16.

However, Article 41 of the Enforcement Decree of the Special Regulation of the Military Service Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 1292, Apr. 30, 1990; Presidential Decree No. 14397, Oct. 6, 1994; amended by Presidential Decree No. 14397) provides that the special provisions of Articles 110 through 112, and 114 of the Enforcement Decree of the former Enforcement Decree of the Military Service Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to permission for overseas travel, permission for extension of the period of overseas physical stay, confirmation of departure, and reporting of return to Korea to the special recruit who are included in the special recruit service, and Article 113 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Special Regulation of the Military Service Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 1292, Apr. 30, 199; Presidential Decree No. 19068, Apr. 1, 199; Presidential Decree No. 20010, Oct. 14, 199>

Therefore, the court below, after remanding, shall be deemed to have obtained the permission of travel until August 5, 1986 from the special supplementary service personnel under the former Military Service Act, and the plaintiff who left the United States upon obtaining the permission of travel on August 31, 1992. However, before the plaintiff's notification of the fine for negligence was issued ( December 29, 192) on October 16, 1991 and obtained the right of permanent residence of the United States for more than one year before residing in the United States and was designated by the Minister of Education on March 23, 193 for the purpose of permanent residence in the Republic of Korea, if the plaintiff returned to the Republic of Korea on March 5, 1993 and was designated by the Minister of Education on March 23, 1993, the plaintiff shall be deemed to have obtained the permission of travel until March 5, 1993, and eventually, it cannot be deemed that the disposition of the plaintiff's transfer to the Republic of Korea was unlawful.

The judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as otherwise alleged.

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

Justices Chocheon-sung (Presiding Justice)