The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

1. The reasons for the court’s explanation concerning this case are as follows: (a) the part concerning the Plaintiff’s assertion of “misunderstanding of administrative body” among the judgment of the court of first instance (from June to July 12) is identical to the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for a modification of the following contents under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. On the first argument, the part concerning the amendment of the judgment of the first instance: The delegation of the administrative authority to determine “misunderstanding of an administrative body” is recognized only when a law allows the delegation of authority, since an administrative authority transferred a specific authority to another administrative authority under the law to exercise the authority of the delegated authority. On the contrary, even where a law does not permit the delegation of authority, the internal delegation of the administrative authority is in fact permitted by the Minister of Employment and Labor to exercise its authority in order to promote the convenience of internal administrative affairs of the administrative authority. Therefore, in the case of delegation of authority, the delegated authority may exercise its authority under its own name, but in the case of internal delegation, the delegated authority may exercise its authority only under the name of the delegated authority, but may not exercise its authority under its own name (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 80Nu344, Dec. 11, 198; 94Nu6475, Nov. 28, 1995; and the Insurance Premium Collection Act requires the reduction of insurance premiums and other special matters prescribed by the Minister of the Insurance Act.