[1] The standing to be a defendant in an appeal litigation, the instruction or notification of a superior administrative agency or other administrative agency, and whether the delegation or entrustment of authority constitutes an administrative disposition subject to an appeal litigation (negative)

[2] In a case where the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service (“Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service”) sought confirmation and revocation of the above disposition against the National Health Insurance Corporation pursuant to Article 4 of the former Act on the Collection of Insurance Premiums, etc. for Employment Insurance and Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance, the case holding that the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the person entitled to imposition and collection of employment insurance premium and the person entitled to appeal against the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service and the person entitled to imposition and collection

[1] In principle, an administrative disposition, etc., which is the subject of a lawsuit, should be the defendant, and the same applies to an administrative disposition, which is rendered under the name of the administrative agency with the authority delegated or entrusted by the administrative agency with the authority delegated or entrusted by the superior administrative agency or other administrative agency. Furthermore, the aforementioned instructions, notifications, delegation or entrustment of authority is an internal matter of the administrative agency and does not directly affect the rights and obligations of the people, and thus does not constitute an administrative disposition that is the subject of an appeal litigation.

[2] In a case where the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation filed a claim for nullification and revocation of the above disposition against the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation pursuant to Article 4 of the former Act on the Collection of Insurance Premiums, etc. for Employment Insurance and Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance (amended by Act No. 9989, Jan. 27, 2010) with the local government Gap, the case holding that the judgment below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to eligibility for appeal against the person holding the authority to impose the above disposition, since Article 5 of the Addenda of the above Act provides that "the act of the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation under the former Act before the above Act enters into force shall be deemed the act of the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation before the above Act enters into force," and Article 5 of the Addenda of the above Act provides that "the act of the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation under the former Act shall be deemed to be the act of the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation before the above Act enters into force, and at least the notification of the insurance premium shall be deemed to have been entrusted by the Minister of Employment and Labor under its name among the authority to impose the employment insurance premium on Gap.

[1] Articles 2(1)1 and 13 of the Administrative Litigation Act / [2] Article 13 of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 4 of the former Act on the Collection of Insurance Premiums, etc. for Employment Insurance and Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance (amended by Act No. 1015, Mar. 22, 2010); Article 5 of the Addenda (amended by Act No. 1010, Jan. 27, 2010)

[1] Supreme Court Decision 94Nu1197 delivered on June 14, 1994 (Gong1994Ha, 1979)

Chuncheon City (Attorney Lee Jong-chul, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

National Health Insurance Corporation

Seoul High Court (Chuncheon) Decision 2012Nu619 decided September 26, 2012

The judgment of the court of first instance is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Chuncheon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

An appeal litigation is a matter of principle that an administrative agency, which is the subject of an administrative disposition, should be the defendant in its external name. It is not different from the administrative disposition by the instruction or notification of a superior administrative agency or another administrative agency. This also applies to a disposition taken under the name of the delegated administrative agency upon delegation or entrustment of authority. The foregoing instruction, notification, delegation or entrustment of authority is an internal matter of an administrative agency, and does not directly affect the rights and obligations of the people, and thus does not constitute an administrative disposition that is the subject of an appeal litigation (see Supreme Court Decision 94Nu197, Jun. 14, 1994, etc.).

According to the records, after the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation issued a disposition to impose and notify each of the instant employment insurance premiums to the Plaintiff, the Defendant was entrusted by the Minister of Employment and Labor with the business of notifying and receiving insurance premiums, collecting insurance premiums, etc. performed by the previous Korea Labor Welfare Corporation under Article 4 of the former Act on the Collection of Insurance Premiums, etc. for Employment Insurance and Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance (amended by Act No. 9989, Jan. 27, 2010). Article 5 of the Addenda of the above Act provides that “the act of the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation under the previous provisions before the enforcement of the above Act shall be deemed the act of the National Health Insurance Corporation before the enforcement of the above Act.” Thus, the business of notifying at least insurance premiums in the authority related to the imposition of the employment insurance premiums of the Plaintiff shall be deemed that the Defendant was entrusted by the Minister of Employment and Labor in its name.

Thus, the defendant of an appeal seeking nullification and revocation of the imposition of each employment insurance premium of this case shall be the defendant of this case who is entrusted with the right to collect notice from the Minister of Employment and Labor and deemed to have issued the notice of imposition in his/her external name. Even if the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation notified the defendant of the imposition of insurance premium and notified the defendant of the imposition of the insurance premium, it is only an internal issue within the administrative agency, and the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation cannot be deemed the subject of the disposition, and therefore, the defendant of

Nevertheless, for the reasons indicated in its holding, the court below determined that the subject of the disposition in this case is the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation, and the lawsuit in this case against the defendant who is the other party to the defendant is unlawful as it is against a person who is not a defendant-qualified. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the person with employment insurance premium and the qualification for the defendant

Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and this case is sufficient for the Supreme Court to directly render a judgment, and thus, the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the case shall be remanded to the court of first instance for a new trial and determination in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 418 of the Civil Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent

Justices Park Poe-dae (Presiding Justice)