The case holding that there was no illegality in exercising the defendant's right to ask for a false mistake in the subject of the administrative litigation

Despite the fact that the adjudication of the Central Land Tribunal is subject to the administrative litigation, if the local Land Tribunal is the defendant and the lawsuit is filed against the adjudication of the local Land Tribunal, the court is dismissed without giving the opportunity to correct the defendant.

Articles 75-2 and 74 of the Land Expropriation Act, Article 126 of the Civil Procedure Act, Article 6 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Supreme Court Decision 71Nu132 Delivered on November 30, 1971

Plaintiff 1 and one other, Attorney Kim Jong-soo, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Jeonnam-do Local Land Tribunal

Gwangju High Court Decision 76Gu81 delivered on April 28, 1977

All appeals are dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

We examine the grounds of appeal by the plaintiffs' attorney.

According to Article 74 of the Land Expropriation Act, a person who is dissatisfied with the adjudication of the local Land Expropriation Committee may raise an objection to the Central Land Expropriation Committee through the relevant local Land Expropriation Committee within one month from the date of receiving the original copy at the time of the adjudication. According to Article 75-2 (1) of the same Act, if an objection is raised against the adjudication, an administrative litigation may be instituted within one month from the date of receiving the written adjudication. According to the purport of the above provisions, an administrative litigation against land expropriation shall be instituted against the Central Land Expropriation Committee, which is not the Central Land Expropriation Committee, as the defendant, and the adjudication against the objection of the said Committee shall be subject to administrative litigation. Thus, in this case, it shall be interpreted that the local Land Expropriation Committee, which is not the Central Land Expropriation Committee, is the defendant and the said local Land Expropriation Committee has instituted an administrative litigation against the adjudication of the said local Land Expropriation Committee (see Supreme Court Decision 71Nu132, Nov. 30, 1971). Accordingly, the court below's decision that the lawsuit of this case was unlawful on the premise that the judgment of this case did not affect the plaintiff's dismissal.

Therefore, all arguments are without merit, and the appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs who have lost them. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Presiding Justice (Presiding Justice)