2012Nu173 Revocation, such as revocation of recognition of workplace skill development training courses

A Stock Company

The Head of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office Seoul Gangnam District Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2011Guhap17011 decided November 24, 2011

November 14, 2013

November 14, 2013:

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.

1. Purport of claim

On March 22, 2011, the Defendant’s order to refund the cost of vocational skills development training granted to the Plaintiff is revoked.

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.

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 on October 21, 2013, after the instant appeal was filed, the Plaintiff revoked ex officio the order to return KRW 164,231,970 during the period of restriction on payment to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim seeking the revocation of the above return order is seeking the revocation of a non-existent disposition, and thus becomes unlawful as there is no interest in the lawsuit. Therefore, the part against the Defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the Plaintiff’s claim corresponding to the revocation portion is dismissed. It is so decided as per

The presiding judge, public judge and senior judge;

Judges, Appointment and Civility

Judges Cho Jong-sung