logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.11.23 2017구합56452
불합격처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. After graduating from a medical college on February 2009, the Plaintiff obtained a medical license on March 2, 2009. From September 1, 2013 to August 31, 2016, the Plaintiff completed the family department training course at the “B Hospital” (hereinafter “instant hospital”).

B. On October 11, 2016, the Defendant publicly announced the implementation plan for the 60th specialist qualifying examination in the year 2017. According to the foregoing public announcement, the above examination is divided into the first written examination and the second practical examination. The second examination is an applicant for the first qualifying examination in the 59th specialist qualifying examination and the first qualifying examination in the 60th specialist qualifying examination.

C. The Plaintiff applied for the 60th specialist qualifying examination with the family department as a professional subject, and passed the 1st test conducted on January 6, 2017, and applied for the 2nd test conducted on January 16 and 17th of the same month (hereinafter “instant test”).

On February 3, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition of failure (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff fell short of 60 points, which are the successful score as a result of the second examination evaluation.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 2, 5, 7, and 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the disposition of refusal with the Seoul Administrative Court No. 2016Guhap8583, Dec. 28, 2016, as the Plaintiff did not confirm the completion of the training course and requested the Defendant to recognize the Defendant’s eligibility to undergo the qualifying examination.

Accordingly, the defendant held an emergency meeting on December 31, 2016 and decided to grant the plaintiff the qualification for qualifying examination for medical specialists.

Meanwhile, the instant examination was conducted on January 16, 201 and 17 P.M., respectively, and the applicants were classified into A.M. and P.M. respectively, and the relevant examination time is based on the license numbers of doctors.

arrow