The judgment below

The part against the Defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the binding force and res judicata of the judgment of revocation (Defendant’s ground of appeal No. 1)

A. (1) Article 30(1) of the Administrative Litigation Act provides that “The final and conclusive judgment revoking the disposition, etc. shall bind the administrative agency which is a party to the case and other administrative agencies concerned.”

The term "efficiencies" of the final and conclusive judgment refers to the recognition of the claim for cancellation in the judgment, which imposes an obligation on the administrative agency concerned and other relevant administrative agencies to act in accordance with the intent of the final and conclusive judgment.

In contrast, “s judicata” provided for in Articles 216 and 218 of the Civil Procedure Act, which are applicable mutatis mutandis to an administrative litigation pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, does not allow a subsequent suit that is identical to the subject matter of a prior suit that has res judicata, and at the same time, where the subject matter of a prior suit is not the same as that of the subject matter of a prior suit, the determination of the subject matter of a prior suit is prior to or contradictory to the subject matter of a prior suit, the subsequent suit does not allow the determination

(2) The binding force of a final and conclusive judgment on November 28, 2013 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da19083, Nov. 28, 2013) is not determined on specific grounds of illegality, such as the main text and premise of the said judgment, but the previous disposition was revoked by a judgment.

Even if there is a reason different from the previous disposition, it does not conflict with the binding effect.

Here, whether it is the same reason or a different reason should be determined depending on whether it is identical to the previous reason and basic facts of the previous disposition that is deemed illegal in a final and conclusive judgment. The identity of the basic facts is identical in the basic point of view with the social facts, which are the basis of the disposition, based on the specific facts prior to the legal evaluation of the grounds for disposition.