(a) The criteria to determine whether there is a significant defect in the fact-finding in an administrative disposition, if any, that defect is obvious;

B. Whether “Persons recognized by the Minister of Education as having the same or higher academic background as high school graduates” under Article 27 of the Enforcement Decree of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act includes those who are recognized as having the same or higher academic background as high school graduates in entering schools of higher grade pursuant to Article 81(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Education Act (affirmative)

A. In a case where there is a defect that misleads the facts in an administrative disposition, if it is not objectively clear even if the defect is serious, the disposition cannot be deemed null and void. Thus, in order to clarify the defect, it should be deemed that the material based on which the mistake of facts was made lacks external appearance, or it is evident that it is impossible to objectively recognize the establishment or authenticity of the content thereof, and if it is evident only when the material on the facts should be accurately examined, such defect is apparent.

B. According to the provisions of Article 27 of the Enforcement Decree of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, only graduates of high schools or higher schools or those recognized by the Minister of Education as having equivalent or higher academic background shall be qualified to apply for the herb druggist examination. However, in light of the purpose of legislation of education-related Acts and subordinate statutes and the Enforcement Decree of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, those who are recognized as having equivalent or higher academic background with high school graduates are included in those who are recognized as having equivalent or higher academic background with high school graduates.

(a) Article 19 of the Administrative Litigation Act; Article 27 of the Enforcement Decree of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act; Article 81 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Educational Act;

A. Supreme Court Decision 82Nu154 decided Feb. 28, 1984 (Gong1984,612) 84Nu250 decided Nov. 12, 1985 (Gong1986,40)

[Judgment of the court below]

Attorney Park Jong-nam-do et al., Counsel for defendant assistant defendant-appellant

Busan High Court Decision 90Gu2628 delivered on June 14, 1991

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The Plaintiff’s attorney’s ground of appeal is examined.

1. Where there is a defect that misleads the factual relations in an administrative disposition and such defect is serious, if it is objectively unclear, the disposition cannot be deemed null and void. In order to clarify the defect, it should be deemed that the material based on which the factual basis of the factual basis is obviously insufficient, or that it is impossible to objectively prove its establishment or authenticity. If it is evident that there is a defect only after accurately investigating the material of the factual basis, such defect is apparent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 82Nu154, Feb. 28, 1984; Supreme Court Decision 84Nu250, Nov. 12, 1985).

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below found the facts of this case's disposition that the above defendant's assistant witness was issued to the above principal at the time of the above examination with an average of 68.80 points from the above examination, and the highest points among the applicants for the above defendant's assistant witness for the same business in the same area as the above school's graduate certificate was confirmed and decided as the successful applicant on December 30 of the same year after he was confirmed as the above school's successful applicant. The court below found the facts of this case's disposition based on the records that the court below found the above facts of the facts of the facts of the facts of the facts of the facts of the above finding of facts in light of the records and there were no errors of incomplete deliberation or violation of the rules of evidence.

In light of the above facts, even if the above defendant's assistant to the above school was unable to normally graduate from the above school, and the above certificate of graduation was found to be in violation of the truth, and the defendant's passing disposition of this case was judged to be true, such defect can only be revealed if the facts are accurately examined, and it cannot be deemed to be clear that the defect is serious, and if the contents of the application form or documents to be submitted are different from the facts in the above herb druggist examination notice, the above defect cannot be deemed to be an obvious defect. Thus, the above defect cannot be deemed to be a disposition of invalidation as a matter of course, apart from the fact that the passing disposition of this case can be revoked.

Ultimately, the court below's rejection of the plaintiff's claim based on the premise that the disposition of this case is null and void as a matter of course is just and there is no error of law as to the theory of lawsuit.

2. According to the provisions of Article 27 of the Enforcement Decree of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, only graduates of high school or higher school or those recognized by the Minister of Education as having the same or higher school career shall be qualified to apply for the herb druggist examination. However, in light of the relevant education-related Acts and subordinate statutes and the legislative intent of the Enforcement Decree of the above Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, those recognized as having the same or higher school career as the graduates of high school shall be construed as including those having recognized as having the same or higher school career as the graduates of high school under Article 81(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Education Act. Therefore, there is no reason to criticize the judgment

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Song Man-man (Presiding Justice)