2017Nu11389 Revocation of Demand for correction

A school juristic person exclusive driving school

The Minister of Education

Daejeon District Court Decision 2016Guhap104394 Decided April 20, 2017

July 20, 2017

August 17, 2017

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s corrective order against the Plaintiff on August 31, 2016 regarding any change in the articles of incorporation shall be revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court’s reasoning is as follows: (a) it is stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except as otherwise stated in Paragraph (2) below, that the Defendant’s additional decision on the assertion that the Defendant emphasizes again in the trial proceedings is identical to that of the first instance judgment; and (b) thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of

2. Additional determination

The defendant asserts to the effect that the disposition of this case by the defendant cannot be seen as affecting the legal status of the plaintiff because the plaintiff did not comply with the defendant's request for correction of the articles of incorporation, and there is no provision imposing any sanction or disadvantage, and thus the disposition of this case is merely an "administrative guidance," which is a non-power factual act, not an "administrative disposition" subject to appeal litigation.

On the other hand, Article 20-2 of the Private School Act provides that "when the competent agency violates the provisions of the Private School Act, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, or the Higher Education Act, or fails to comply with orders issued thereunder, for the reason that the approval of the appointment of an executive officer of a private school can be revoked under Article 20-2 of the Private School Act (Article 20-1 of the Private School Act)." The disposition of this case is a corrective order under Article 45 (3) of the Private School Act, and the approval of taking office may be revoked if the plaintiff as a private school corporation fails to comply with the above corrective order. Therefore, the disposition of this case constitutes an administrative disposition that directly affects the legal status of the plaintiff, which

3. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Allowable judges of the presiding judge

Judges

Judges Park Jong-dae