1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The Plaintiff’s ground for claim as stated in the Plaintiff’s written application for modification of the purport of claim and the ground for claim as of July 17, 2018 is as specified in the attached Form.

(2) If a public official in charge of such administrative disposition is deemed to have lost objective legitimacy by failing to perform objective duty of care, it shall be reasonable to deem that the public official in charge of such administrative disposition satisfied the requirements for State liability under Article 2 of the State Compensation Act in a case where it is recognized that such administrative disposition has lost objective legitimacy by failing to perform objective duty of care, even though any administrative disposition was revoked in an appeal litigation after the judgment was made after the plaintiff was rendered, it shall be reasonable to deem that the public official in charge of such administrative disposition satisfied the requirements for State liability under Article 2 of the State Compensation Act. In this case, whether the administrative disposition has lost objective legitimacy shall be determined by taking into account all the circumstances such as the type and nature of the gains from infringement, the form and reason of the administrative disposition being infringed, the degree of involvement of the victim in the exercise of the administrative disposition, and the degree of damage, etc.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that a public official in charge caused damage to the Plaintiff, as alleged by the Plaintiff, due to the Defendant’s intentional or negligent act or negligence, and there is no other sufficient evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Rather, the fact that the administrative litigation filed by the Plaintiff is a final and conclusive judgment against the Plaintiff (part of dismissal, partial dismissal) is significant in this court.

In light of the Seoul Administrative Court's 201Guhap3633 Seoul High Court's 2012Nu12046 Supreme Court's 2013Du321 above Seoul High Court's 2012Nu12046, the following judgments are additionally stated.

Furthermore, this case.