beta
Main Issues
Relation between removal from office and removal from office of the same reason
Summary of Judgment
Where a public official is removed for the same reason after he/she was removed from his/her position for any reason, the former removal from his/her position shall lose its effect.
[Reference Provisions]
Articles 73-2(1) and 78 of the State Public Officials Act
Reference Cases
Supreme Court Decision 77Nu148 Delivered on December 26, 1978
Plaintiff-Appellee
Plaintiff
Defendant-Appellant
Attorney Yoon-hee et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant
Judgment of the lower court
Seoul High Court Decision 78Gu502 delivered on April 23, 1979
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
The record reveals that the plaintiff received 15,000 won in total from the related business entity twice in relation to his duties, the defendant can find out that the plaintiff was removed from his position on February 14, 1976 and then the plaintiff was removed from his position on March 2 of the same year. Therefore, the decision of the court below that recognized the removal from position and removal from his position for the same reason is acceptable, and it cannot be said that there is a misunderstanding of facts such as the theory of lawsuit or incomplete deliberation or misunderstanding of facts.
In addition, if a public official is removed for the same reason after he was removed from his position for any reason, the former removal from his position will lose its validity (see Supreme Court Decision 77Nu148 delivered on December 26, 1978). In the same purport, the decision of the court below that the removal from his position against the plaintiff dated February 14, 1976 by the defendant was invalidated by the above removal from his position on March 2, 1976 is just and it cannot be said that there is a misapprehension of legal principles, such as the theory of lawsuit.
Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and the costs of the appeal shall be borne by the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Jeong Tae-won (Presiding Justice)