beta
Main Issues
Whether the act of transferring desolate river sites under Article 77 of the River Act is subject to administrative litigation.
Summary of Judgment
The act of transferring desolate river sites by the Minister of Construction and Transportation or an agency entrusted with his authority pursuant to the provisions of Article 77 of the River Act is nothing more than a juristic act under private law conducted as a private economic entity, and it is not an administrative disposition under public law conducted by an administrative agency in the superior position as a public authority. It is not subject to administrative litigation.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 2 of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 77 of the River Act
Reference Cases
Supreme Court Decision 84Nu736 Decided March 26, 1985
Plaintiff-Appellant
[Judgment of the court below]
Defendant-Appellee
The Administrator of the Daejeon National Land Management Agency
Intervenor joining the Defendant
Defendant 1 and 17 others
Judgment of the lower court
Seoul High Court Decision 87Gu276 delivered on November 16, 1987
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
Reasons
We examine the grounds of appeal.
The act of transferring desolate river sites by the Minister of Construction and Transportation or an agency entrusted with his authority under Article 77 of the River Act is nothing more than a juristic act under private law conducted as a private economic subject, and it is not an administrative disposition under public law conducted by an administrative agency as a superior authority of public authority, and it is not subject to administrative litigation (Article 84Nu736 delivered on March 26, 1985).
Therefore, there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as asserted by the court below in the same purport that the defendant's rejection of the transfer of the river site of this case is not an administrative disposition subject to administrative litigation. The argument is without merit.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Kim Jong-chul (Presiding Justice)