A. Whether an application for a civil petition for grievance filed with the National Ombudsman is deemed an administrative appeal claim;

(b) Where the submission of an application for civil petition for grievance to the National Ombudsman is exceptionally deemed an administrative appeal;

A. In full view of the relevant provisions of the Administrative Regulations and the Civil Petitions Act, the National Ombudsman’s grievance settlement system is a system to advise the head of a relevant administrative agency to take appropriate corrective measures in cases where there are reasonable grounds to recognize that administrative dispositions, etc. are illegal and unjust after consulting and investigating civil petitions for grievances of citizens related to administration, and thus, the purpose or nature of the system differs from the procedure for remedy for dissatisfaction such as filing of objections, requests for examination, or applications for rulings under administrative appeals under the Administrative Appeals Act or other special Acts. Therefore, it cannot be deemed that a civil petition for grievance filed with the National Ombudsman constitutes an administrative appeal required as a prior procedure of administrative litigation.

(b) Where it is obvious that the application received by the National Ombudsman is the purport of seeking correction against the disposition of an administrative agency, and it is sent by the National Ombudsman to the relevant disposition agency or the ruling agency, the request for administrative appeal may be deemed to have been made when the application is received by the National Ombudsman pursuant to Article 17 (2) and (7) of the Administrative Appeals Act.

Article 16(1) of the Framework Act on Administrative Regulation and Civil Affairs, Article 18 of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 17(2), Article 17(7) and Article 18 of the Administrative Appeals Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellee)

[Judgment of the court below]

Attorney Kim Chang-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 94Gu11394 delivered on March 7, 1995

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The defendant's attorney's grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below rejected the plaintiff's appeal on the ground that since the lawsuit of this case was filed without going through the procedure of administrative appeal, which is the procedure of the previous trial, the defendant's defense against the defendant's main defense against the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, according to the evidences, the defendant's notification of each disposition of this case to the plaintiff, which is the object of the lawsuit of this case to the court below, the period of administrative appeal, the ruling authority, and the transit procedure is not known at all within 180 days from the date of the administrative disposition (Article 18 (6) and (3) of the Administrative Appeals Act). In such a case, when the plaintiff submits a written appeal to any other administrative agency that is not a legitimate transit agency, the administrative agency which received it without delay shall send it to the legitimate competent administrative agency (Article 17 (2) of the same Act). In such a case, in calculating the period of appeal, the plaintiff shall be deemed to have filed an appeal upon the submission of the above written appeal to the National Safety Committee on April 15, 1994.

2. However, in full view of the relevant provisions of the Framework Act on Administrative Regulation and Civil Petitions (hereinafter “the Act”), the National Ombudsman’s grievance settlement system is a system to advise the head of the relevant administrative agency to take appropriate corrective measures in a case where there are reasonable grounds to recognize that administrative dispositions, etc. are illegal and unjust after consulting and investigating civil petitions for grievances of citizens related to administration, and thus, it is different from the purpose or character of the system to rectify the inconvenience and burden of citizens. Thus, the National Ombudsman’s civil petition for grievance is not deemed an administrative appeal required as an exclusive procedure for administrative litigation. However, it is obvious that the application received by the National Ombudsman is a content of the purpose of seeking correction of the administrative agency’s disposition, and it can be deemed that an administrative appeal is filed when the application is received by the National Ombudsman pursuant to Article 17(2) and (7) of the Administrative Appeals Act.

However, according to the facts duly established by the court below, the plaintiff submitted a petition for correction of each of the dispositions of this case to the National Ombudsman. Thus, the plaintiff cannot be deemed to have filed an administrative appeal unless there are special circumstances such as the above petition was sent to the defendant or the Seoul Special Metropolitan City ruling authority.

Nevertheless, the court below rejected the defendant's main safety defense for the reasons indicated in its decision, without examining and determining whether the above petition was sent to the defendant or the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor, who is the disposition agency, and therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to administrative appeal and failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, and it is obvious that such illegality affected the conclusion of the judgment. Therefore, there is a reason to point this out.

3. Therefore, without examining the remaining grounds of appeal, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Shin Sung-sung (Presiding Justice)