logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.05.14 2019누67243
수사의뢰취소거부취소
Text

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which is written by the same as that of the corresponding part among the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with

2. On the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, the period between 8 and 11 pages 3 and 4 shall be as follows.

3. We examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio on the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.

An administrative disposition, which is the object of an appeal litigation, refers to an act of an administrative agency’s public law, which is directly related to the duty of rights of the people, such as ordering the establishment of rights or the burden of obligations under Acts and subordinate statutes with respect to a specific matter, or giving rise to other legal effects, and an act which does not directly cause legal changes in the legal status of the other party or other related

(See Supreme Court Decisions 83Nu485 delivered on May 22, 1984, 2001Du10578 delivered on May 17, 2002, etc.). The response of this case seeking revocation by the Plaintiff is not only a response to a civil petition, but also a content of the response is known to the effect that “us is investigating insurance fraud in order to establish public interest or sound order in insurance transactions in accordance with the Insurance Business Act, etc., and is subject to a judgment by an investigative agency.

'' is merely an information and thus cannot be viewed as affecting the plaintiff's rights and obligations or legal status. Thus, it is difficult to see that the above reply constitutes an administrative disposition subject to appeal litigation.

Even if the instant reply constitutes a rejection of a request to revoke an administrative disposition that the Plaintiff submitted to the Defendant on November 8, 2018, the administrative agency made a request for revocation of the instant notification.

arrow