logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.06.17 2015누67245
제주4.3사건 희생자결정 무효확인 청구의 소
Text

All appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment by this court as stated in paragraph (2) of this Article, and therefore, it is cited by the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination by this Court

A. The plaintiffs asserted that the plaintiffs' grounds for appeal include not only basic rights, the basic principles of the Constitution, and the interests with protection value, but also the national identity directed by the Republic of Korea as well as the principles of the rule of law to expand the functions of protecting citizens' rights and controlling administrative legality, rather than narrowly interpreting the legal interests and blocking the possibility of judicial review with respect to the lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of the claims filed by the plaintiffs. From this point of view, plaintiffs B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I are entitled to seek confirmation of invalidity of the case as the bereaved family members of the victims.

B. “A person who has legal interest in seeking confirmation of the validity or existence of a disposition, etc.” as prescribed by Article 35 of the Administrative Litigation Act refers to a person who is likely to infringe or inevitably infringe on his/her rights or interests protected by law by the pertinent disposition.

Where administrative laws and regulations which have determined the relevant dispositions are not limited to absorbing and resolving the specific interests of many and unspecified persons entirely in general public interest, but are interpreted to include the purpose of protecting them as individual interests to which they belong, such interests also fall under the legally protected interests mentioned in this context, and persons who are likely to be infringed or inevitably infringed on such dispositions shall have standing to sue in a lawsuit seeking nullification of the administrative dispositions in question.

Supreme Court Decision 94Nu14230 Decided June 30, 1995; Supreme Court Decision 2003Du175 Decided August 16, 2004

arrow