ipso facto confirmation disposition is not an administrative disposition.

Where a person who is released from his position under the State Public Officials Act is not assigned to a position even after six months have passed, the effect of retirement naturally occurs at the expiration of six months, and thus, it cannot be viewed as an administrative disposition.

Article 73-2 of the State Public Officials Act

Supreme Court Decision 76Nu144 Delivered on September 28, 1977

Plaintiff

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 3 others, Counsel for defendant-appellee

Daegu High Court Decision 78Gu196 delivered on June 12, 1979

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The plaintiff's grounds of appeal are examined.

If a person who is released from his position under the State Public Officials Act is not assigned to his position within six months, the provision that he shall be retired ipso facto from his position within six months shall naturally arise due to the continuation of the period of six months. Thus, the defendant's ipso facto confirmation disposition against the plaintiff on August 7, 1978 cannot be deemed an administrative disposition and thus it shall not be subject to administrative litigation. The defendant's ipso facto confirmation disposition against the plaintiff on the plaintiff on the same ground after the disposition against the plaintiff was taken against the head of the office of the branch office of the Busan Metropolitan City Maritime Affairs. However, the above disposition is a disposition against the non-authorized person, and thus it shall not be deemed that the removal disposition against the plaintiff is void automatically.

Ultimately, the decision of the court below is lawful and without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kang Jae-hee (Presiding Justice)