logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2013.11.14. 선고 2012누25127 판결
사업주직업능력개발훈련비용반환명령등취소
Cases

2012Nu25127 Revocation of orders, etc. to refund training expenses for vocational skills development

Plaintiff-Appellant

A Stock Company

Defendant Appellant

The Head of Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office Seoul Southern Site

The first instance judgment

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2012Guhap8823 decided July 13, 2012

Conclusion of Pleadings

November 14, 2013

Imposition of Judgment

November 14, 2013

Text

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed;

2. 10% of the total litigation costs shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of claim

On April 21, 2011, the Defendant issued a one-year disposition to restrict the payment of subsidies to the Plaintiff, and issued an order to return KRW 5,466,020,034 of training expenses paid during the period of restriction on the payment (hereinafter the instant disposition), and issued an order to return KRW 671,412 of the illegally received amount, and issued an additional collection of the same amount.

2. Purport of appeal

The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revocation shall be dismissed.

Reasons

Judgment ex officio is made.

If an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition becomes void and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Du15343, Oct. 13, 201).

The record reveals the fact that the Defendant revoked the instant disposition ex officio on October 11, 2013, which was subsequent to the filing of the instant appeal.

Thus, the plaintiff's claim seeking the cancellation of the disposition of this case is seeking the cancellation of a non-existent disposition, and becomes unlawful as there is no interest in the lawsuit. Therefore, the part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the cancellation part is dismissed, and it

Judges

The presiding judge, public judge and senior judge;

Judges, Appointment and Civility

Judges Cho Jong-sung

Attached Form

A person shall be appointed.

arrow