The disposition of dismissal from position shall not be contested unless a request for a prescribed examination is made.

Even if Article 65-2 (1) 1-4 of the former Local Public Officials Act (Act No. 2058 of Dec. 23, 68) is illegal, so long as the person subject to the disposition fails to make a request for review of the disposition pursuant to the latter part of Article 67 (2) of the same Act and can not contest the illegality of the disposition, it shall not be determined whether the disposition is legitimate, except in cases where the disposition is null and void automatically.

The latter part of Article 67 (2) of the Local Public Officials Act

68Nu7 decided July 24, 1968

Plaintiff

Daegu Market

Daegu High Court Decision 68Gu84 delivered on June 25, 1969

The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu High Court.

Defendant 2’s ground of appeal No. 2

According to the facts admitted by the original judgment and the purport of the oral argument, the defendant issued a disposition of removal from position pursuant to Article 65-2 (1) 1 subparagraph 4 of the Local Public Officials Act against the plaintiff on June 8, 196, and that the defendant dismissed the plaintiff by ex officio pursuant to Article 65-2 (1) 1 subparagraph 4 of the Local Public Officials Act and Article 65-2 (3) of the same Act after deliberation by the committee for personnel committee on Gyeongbuk-do in accordance with Article 65-2 (3) of the same Act, there is no dispute between the parties. Therefore, the original judgment does not contain any reason falling under Article 65 (1) 1 subparagraph 4 of the same Act from the explanation of the reason, and therefore, the defendant should be granted position without delay

However, in the case where the above disposition of removal from position was unlawful, even if the person subject to the disposition did not request a review pursuant to the latter part of Article 67 (2) of the same Act, and has reached the irrecoverable stage, the propriety of the disposition of removal from position cannot be determined with the legitimacy of the above disposition of removal from position, except for the case where the removal from position is null and void automatically (see Supreme Court Decision 68Nu7 delivered on July 24, 1968). However, it is judged that the disposition of dismissal from position under Article 65-2 (3) of the same Act was unlawful without giving a position for the reason that the removal from position was illegal, regardless of the issue of whether there is illegality in the disposition of removal from position itself and without giving a position for the reason that the removal from position was illegal, it is judged that there is an error of law.

Therefore, according to Article 14 of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 406 of the Civil Procedure Act, it is decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

The two judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) the Red Net Sheet