2010Nu30613 Invalidity of a decision on reduction of working hours

1. A organization;

2. B

3. C trade union;

4. D;

5. E trade union;

6. F;

7. G.

8. H;

Working Hours Exemption Deliberation Committee

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2010Guhap20348 decided August 19, 2010

April 26, 2011

June 7, 2011

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed. 2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The decision of the first instance court is revoked. The defendant confirms that the decision of the limit of working hours exemption made on May 1, 2010 is null and void.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The court's explanation on this case is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the second and fourth parts of the judgment of the court of first instance No. 5, and the second and fourth parts of the judgment as follows. Thus, the court's explanation on this case is acceptable in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420

2. Determination on height "C"

The defendant asserts that the lawsuit in this case is unlawful since the resolution in this case does not fall under an administrative disposition which is the object of an appeal litigation, and thus, the lawsuit in this case seeking confirmation of invalidity thereof is unlawful. Thus, the defendant shall be established in the Ministry of Labor in order to determine the limit of exemption from working hours, and the limit of working hours shall be announced by the Minister of Labor as prescribed by the defendant's deliberation and resolution. Article 11-6 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 22269 of July 12, 2010) provides that when the defendant receives a request from the Minister of Labor for deliberation to determine the limit of exemption from working hours, it shall be deliberated and decided within 60 days from the date of receipt of the request for deliberation and resolution. In full view of the above provisions, it is reasonable to view that the defendant's deliberation and resolution on the limit of exemption from working hours cannot be seen as an internal act of administrative agency, which causes a change in the contents of the defendant's rights and obligations, which are not directly affected by the defendant's decision of exemption from working hours.

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case for which the resolution of this case seeks confirmation of nullity is unlawful (as seen above, it cannot be deemed as an administrative disposition subject to appeal litigation, and thus, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, and if the resolution of this case can be seen as an administrative disposition, if it is deemed that it constitutes an administrative disposition, the defendant has the standing to be the defendant, and the judgment of the first instance court on this point

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is dismissed, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion, and the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge, the senior judge;

Judge Lee Jong-soo

Judges Kim Jae-young