logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.11.01 2017누67799
난민불인정결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the supplement of the following judgment, thereby citing this case in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Supplementary judgment

(a) When a person selects the method for filing a revocation lawsuit immediately with the knowledge of an administrative disposition, he/she shall file a revocation lawsuit within 90 days from the date he/she becomes aware of such disposition, and when he/she selects the method for filing an administrative appeal, he/she shall file an administrative appeal within 90 days from the date he/she becomes aware of such disposition and file a revocation lawsuit within 90 days from

Therefore, in a case where a revocation lawsuit is not filed without filing an administrative appeal within 90 days from the date on which a disposition is known, the period for filing the subsequent lawsuit is expired, and the subsequent lawsuit for revocation is illegal and illegal, and the subsequent lawsuit for revocation was filed within 90 days from the date on which a written ruling on an illegal administrative appeal is served, and the subsequent lawsuit for revocation is filed with respect to the original disposition within 90 days from the date on which the written ruling is served. Thus, the revocation

(Supreme Court Decision 201Du18786 Decided November 24, 2011). This does not change that the judgment related to the substance was made in a ruling on an illegal administrative appeal.

As the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on February 10, 2017 after the receipt of the instant disposition on December 3, 2015 and the lapse of 30 days thereafter, even if the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the original disposition within 90 days from the date of receiving the written adjudication after a ruling on an unlawful objection was rendered, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it was filed after the lapse of the period for filing the lawsuit.

B. Furthermore, all of the evidence and arguments presented by the Plaintiff are examined.

arrow