logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1963. 7. 25. 선고 63누65 판결
[판정취소청구][집11(2)행,026]
Main Issues

Whether or not the cancellation or change of the order of compensation can be urged for the reason that there is an error in the adjudication of liability for compensation by the members of the Council.

Summary of Judgment

It is not possible to seek cancellation of the compensation order on the ground that the reimbursement system is illegal.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 22 of the former High Court Act, Article 2 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Plaintiff-Appellant

Mabalk

Defendant-Appellee

Minister of Construction and Transportation

The court below

Seoul High Court Decision 61Na139 delivered on March 30, 1963

Text

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

Reasons

As to the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal

The court below's decision that the defendant's order of compensation should not be dismissed on the ground that it is not appropriate to revoke or change the order of compensation within the statutory period. However, according to the provisions of Article 32 of the former Review Act, if the court below's decision of liability for compensation is made, the competent minister or supervisory organ of the person judged liable for compensation must compensate it within the time limit determined by the court below and execute such decision. The court below's decision has a final and conclusive nature of quasi-judicial nature which restricts the administrative agency concerned with the pertinent accounting officer, as well as the administrative disposition, because the court below's decision of liability for compensation can not be revoked or changed except for the case by a retrial as stipulated in Article 32 of the above above, and since the court below's decision cannot be cancelled or changed, the competent minister or supervisory organ of the court below's decision cannot be viewed as unlawful or unlawful for the reason that the court below's decision cannot be justified for the reason that the court below's decision cannot be justified for the reason that the court below's decision did not contain an error of law or law of law.

[Judgment of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Na-Jap (Presiding Judge) Dog-Jak and Mag-Jak, the maximum Magman Mag-ri

arrow
심급 사건
-서울고등법원 1963.3.30.선고 61행139
본문참조조문
기타문서