logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.01.12 2016누66126
유치원설립자명의변경무효 및 설립자명의변경인가처분무효
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

In the first instance trial, the Plaintiff requested the Defendants to confirm the authorization of the change of the name of each kindergarten B and the change of each kindergarten B in the name of each kindergarten at the Defendant’s office of education, as stated in the purport of the claim, respectively, and the court of first instance dismissed all the instant lawsuit.

Accordingly, among the judgment of the court of first instance, the plaintiff claims the claim.

Since an appeal was filed only on the part of the claim, the claim was sought.

The judgment of the court of first instance on the part of the claim becomes final and conclusive as it is, so this court's object to be tried is the purport of the claim.

The part of Paragraph (b) is limited to this case (the plaintiff filed an application for transfer on December 26, 2016 to this court for lack of jurisdiction as to the part of Paragraph (b) of the first instance judgment. However, as seen earlier, the part of Claim (b) of the first instance judgment was already finalized, as well as the transfer by reason of violation of jurisdiction under Article 31(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, which is applicable mutatis mutandis under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, is not a matter of ex officio investigation by the court, and thus, the transfer by reason of violation of jurisdiction does not have the right to request transfer. Thus, the court's explanation about this case is identical to the ground of the first instance judgment except for deletion from Part 7 through Part 3 of Part 16 of the first instance judgment by the first instance judgment, and therefore, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 8

(1) The court of first instance that rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion, even if the Plaintiff’s assertion was examined in the first instance court, is not significantly different from the Plaintiff’s assertion in the first instance court, and all evidence submitted in the first instance court are examined). Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit in this case is unlawful and dismissed, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the Plaintiff’s appeal.

arrow