208Guhap1741 Revocation of a disposition for approval on the change in the raising of a funeral service for the 2008 Doz.

Stock Company

Law Firm Cheong-do, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

[Defendant-Appellee]

Head of the Busan Metropolitan Government Construction Agency

Attorney Park In-ok, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

March 13, 2009

April 3, 2009

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

On March 5, 2008, the defendant's disposition to revoke the approval of the change in the formation of the Han-gu school curriculum for the non-party A corporation is revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff has an alcoholic beverage for repair and treatment of the weak parts of the steel structure using the mixing mechanism and the co-rating mechanism. On April 17, 2001, the said technology was designated as a new construction technology No. 273 (hereinafter “new construction technology”). The protection period up to April 16, 201.

B. On 202, the Defendant: (a) established a private investment plan that includes the contents that include the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the 5,205m bridge located in the Busan Gangseo-gu, Gangseo-gu, Busan, and the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum; and (b) designated A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “non-party company”). On 204, the non-party company prepared an implementation plan that contains the content that the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum of the curriculum

C. On December 21, 2007, the non-party company requested the defendant to deliberate on design change for the alteration of the formation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the school (hereinafter referred to as the "application for change of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation of the foundation.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, 3, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 4-1, 2, Gap evidence No. 3-1, Gap evidence No. 17, Eul evidence No. 1-1, Eul evidence No. 3, 5, and 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings;

A. The defendant's argument

The defendant's assertion that the non-party company's rejection of the application for change of this case is merely a contract modification under the civil law, not an administrative disposition, and thus is subject to appeal litigation. ② The plaintiff is not the direct counter-party to the disposition of this case, but a third party who has not entered into a contract with the non-party company or the defendant and does not have any legal interests protected by the disposition of this case. Thus, the plaintiff is not standing to sue

B. Determination

(1) Whether the disposition is made

Article 1 of the Act on Public-Private Partnerships in Infrastructure (amended by Act No. 9052, Mar. 28, 2008) provides that "the purpose of this Act is to contribute to the development of the national economy by promoting the investment of the private sector in infrastructure facilities so as to promote their creative and efficient operation," and Article 15 (1) provides that "the project operator shall prepare an implementation plan for the project and obtain approval from the competent authority as prescribed by the Presidential Decree before the implementation of the public-private partnership project. The same shall apply to any modification to the approved contents." Article 45 (1) provides that "the competent authority may supervise the project operator's private investment project and issue an order necessary for supervision only to the extent that is prescribed by the Presidential Decree to the extent that it does not interfere with the free management activities of the project operator. In full view of each of the above provisions, the approval of the application for change of the non-party company is not a contract entered into between the parties on an equal basis as a mere private economic entity, but a defendant, who is the competent authority, in order to realize the above purpose of the public-private action.

(2)existence of standing to sue

(A) A third party, who is not the other party to an administrative disposition, is entitled to file a revocation lawsuit where the interests protected by law are infringed by the administrative disposition, and the legal interests in this context refer to the direct and specific interests protected by the law based on the relevant administrative disposition, and it does not include cases where the third party has indirect or factual and economic interests in relation to the pertinent administrative disposition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Du6026, Oct. 12, 199).

(B) Article 1 of the Construction Technology Management Act provides that "the purpose of this Act is to improve the level of construction technology and to ensure the quality and safety of construction works and to contribute to the promotion of public welfare and the development of the national economy by promoting research and development of construction technology and efficiently using and managing such technology." Article 18 provides that "the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs shall first introduce and improve construction technology developed domestically or abroad so that it is deemed new, inventiveness and field application of construction technology in the Republic of Korea (hereinafter referred to as "technical developer") and if it is deemed necessary to disseminate such technology, he/she may designate and announce such technology as a new technology (hereinafter referred to as "new technology") (hereinafter referred to as "new technology") if it is deemed necessary to protect the technology developer, the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs may protect the technology developer by other means so that he/she can receive royalties for the use of the new technology, and if a technology developer applies for the extension of the protection period due to the expiration of the protection period, the Minister may first determine the use period of the new technology and construction works (hereinafter referred to the contracting authority).

(C) In a comprehensive interpretation of the aforementioned relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, the Construction Technology Management Act does not merely protect the public interest related to the dissemination of new technology, but it is clear that the technology developer's private interest is subject to protection by recognizing the priority of various exclusive positions and contractual rights for the purpose of facilitating the research and development of new technology. Therefore, the status of a person who is subject to a disposition designating new technology under the Construction Technology Management Act is not merely indirect or factual or economic interests, but also constitutes a direct and specific interest protected by the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes. Therefore, even if the Plaintiff was not the party to the instant disposition and the Plaintiff did not enter into a contract with the Defendant or the Nonparty, the Plaintiff is entitled to seek the revocation of the instant disposition made by the Defendant against the non-party company as the technology developer under

(3) Therefore, the defendant's main defense does not appear to be any part of the defense.

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff asserts that the construction technology is protected by the Construction Technology Management Act, and the physical characteristics and construction of the sub-mixed is superior to that of the sub-surbing sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surging sub-surg

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) The technical scope of the new technology of this case is "a technology that treats the weak parts of the products made of lusent powder, metal powder, and poly-mix lusent materials (including damaged parts such as lusent parts) using the same kind of lusent lusing system after repairing and punishing the weak parts of the products." Whether the new technology of this case constitutes the new technology is determined depending on whether the weak parts of the products made of lusent lusing agents other than the lusing process include a process that repairs and shapes the weak parts of the products made of lusent lusium.

(2) On June 13, 2007, prior to the alteration of the formation of the master school of the master school of the name area, the non-party company held three times on July 10, 2007, and November 8, 2007, and the Plaintiff also participated in each of the above discussions and presented his opinion. In addition, the non-party company requested research on the formation of the master school of the YI and the YISISIE, and the non-party company was found to have the highest amount of the tuition fees when considering various aspects such as construction and economic feasibility.

(3) On November 2007, as a result of the investigation into the present state of defects in the construction site of Sejongmix, it was pointed out that the construction site of Gwangju-do, Seocheon-do, and Seocheon-gu, Incheon-gu, Incheon-do, one construction section connection bridge, senior office bridge, and three ju-gu, etc. are being carried out or being carried out in the construction site, and the above site of mixing is continuously reconstructed, and there is a lot of gratory phenomenon after construction, and there is a lot of gratory phenomenon, and there are many maintenance and improvement works due to the grat rate, there is a lot of gratulation phenomenon, the work nature of Dong and summer-gu, is limited, and is very sensitive to damp, and the rapid progress of the grat is not suitable for the coastal area bridge.

(4) In the area of the Nakdong River-gu where a scenic zone is to be constructed, it has a large wind, strong morals, and low damp water due to wind. In addition, there are many restrictions on painting repair, etc. as neighboring cultural heritage protection areas, wetlands protection areas, ecosystems areas, etc. are designated as cultural heritage protection areas, wetlands protection areas, ecosystems, etc.

(5) During the Busan Metropolitan City Construction Technology Deliberation Committee’s deliberation on the change of the formation of a master school of the master school of the Sejong Metropolitan City, the Do principal is important, but the construction of the Do principal is very important. The construction timing is very limited, and the construction of the luxing is considered to be a fatal suspension in the location of the master school of the luxing. The bridge is likely to damage the luxing at any time with shock, etc., and there is a risk of damage to the luxing at a rapid speed of the structure if there is no damage. The luxing of the luxing road was presented to the effect that the luxing of the luxing road is applied to various heavy methods, marine structures, etc., and that it is desirable to select the luxing luxing luxing lux by considering the environmental characteristics of the luxing road.

[Grounds for recognition] Grounds for the above recognition, Eul evidence 20-1 through 5, Eul evidence 2-2, Eul evidence 6-1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 7-1, 2-2, Eul evidence 10-1 through 5, Eul evidence 15-1, 2, 17 and 18, respectively.

D. Determination

(1) According to the initial implementation plan, the general painting of the master-land bridge, which is a newly constructed bridge, shall be cut in the form of the master-mixr, and it is difficult to view that it is included in the scope of the method of maintenance and treatment of the weak parts of the design made using the third-mixr system and the third-mixring system, which is the scope of the new technology of this case, and it is difficult to view it as included in the scope of the method of maintenance and treatment of the weak parts of the design made using the third-mixr

(2) Even if the general painting of housework and drawing items is included in the scope of the instant new technology, when comprehensively considering the provisions of Articles 18 and 34 of the Construction Technology Management Act, the said Act encourage the said Act to reflect the new technology in the design of the construction work, but if the result of performance test and test execution is bad or there are special circumstances, it may not be applied to the new technology, so it is reasonable to deem the administrative act by the administrative agency as a discretionary act in relation to

(3) In the case of distinguishing administrative acts from discretionary acts, the judicial review of the two parties is based on the method of finding facts and interpreting and applying relevant laws and regulations in the case of the former, and then determining the legitimacy of the judgment made by an administrative agency in light of its conclusion. However, in the latter case, in consideration of the possibility of public interest judgment based on the discretion of the administrative agency, the court should only examine whether the act in question is deviates from and abused from discretion without drawing an independent conclusion, and the determination of abuse of discretion is in violation of the principle of mistake, proportionality and equality (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Du6181, Jul. 14, 2005). Thus, it is not desirable for the court to determine whether the disposition in question is more excellent among the small balance of construction works and the construction site construction cost-related construction cost-related construction cost-related construction cost-related construction cost-related construction cost-related construction cost-related construction cost-related construction cost-related construction cost-related construction cost-related construction cost-related construction cost-related construction cost-related cost-related construction cost-related cost-related cost-related cost-related cost-related cost-related cost-related cost-related circumstances.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge, judge and associate judge;

Judge Sung-sung

Judges Kim Jong-chul