(a) cannot seek revocation or invalidity confirmation after the completion of an administrative disposition;

B. The time of determining the existence of confirmation interest is the time of the closing of argument.

1. In an administrative litigation seeking the confirmation of invalidity of an administrative disposition, after the enforcement of an administrative disposition has been completed as a factual act, there is no practical benefit to seek the cancellation of the disposition or the confirmation of invalidity on the ground that there is an illegality in the disposition.

2. Determination as to the existence of benefit of confirmation is not the time of filing a lawsuit but the time of closing of argument.

Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Supreme Court Decision 75Nu230 Decided January 27, 1976, Supreme Court Decision 65Nu25 Decided May 31, 1965, Supreme Court Decision 63Nu122 Decided October 22, 1963

Plaintiff

Dayang-do Litigation Performers Nam-nam and Saelim

Seoul High Court Decision 78Gu402 decided July 10, 1979

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In an administrative litigation seeking the confirmation of invalidity of an administrative disposition, if an administrative disposition had already been executed as a fact act and has already been completed, it is reasonable to seek compensation for damages or reinstatement on the ground that there is an illegality in the disposition, but there is no actual interest in seeking the cancellation of the disposition or the confirmation of invalidity of the disposition (see Supreme Court Decision 75Nu230, Jan. 27, 1976; 65Nu25, May 31, 1965; 63Nu122, Oct. 22, 1963). In this regard, the court below did not err in holding that, as long as the building which is the object of the order to remove and the order to reinstate was already removed by the defendant's vicarious execution and the execution has already been completed, it is the administrative litigation that has no interest in the confirmation, and it is not the time of the closing of argument, and there is no reason to argue that there is no reason to judge the existence of interest in the confirmation, other than the hearing of pleading, or the grounds for appeal on the merits.

Therefore, this appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff who has lost, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Hah-hak (Presiding Justice)