Whether a disposition of restriction on participation by the president of Korea Electric Power Corporation is an administrative disposition (negative)

The sanction imposed on the president of the Korea Electric Power Corporation who has restricted participation in bidding pursuant to the accounting rules of the Korea Electric Power Corporation is merely an act of notification with the private legal effect of not participating in bidding conducted by the said construction work, rather than an act conducted by an administrative agency or its affiliated agency or a public organization delegated by the Korea Electric Power Corporation, and it cannot be deemed that the restriction of participation in bidding conducted by the State or a local government has an act of notification. Thus, it cannot be deemed an administrative disposition subject to administrative litigation.

Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Supreme Court Decision 84Nu647 Delivered on January 22, 1985

Law Firm Jina Co., Ltd., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Attorney Park Tae-young, Counsel for the president of the Korea Electric Power Corporation

Seoul High Court Decision 81Gu590 delivered on June 2, 1982

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.

The court below rejected the plaintiff's action on September 3, 1981 because it is clear that the defendant, pursuant to Article 203 of the Accounting Rules of the Korea Electric Power Corporation, restricted the plaintiff to participate in the bidding from September 3, 1981 to September 3, 1982, the defendant did not have any legal ground to regard the administrative agency prescribed by the Administrative Litigation Act, its affiliated agencies, or the government-invested institutions under Article 203 of the Accounting Rules of the above Corporation were enacted in accordance with Article 19 of the Enforcement Decree of the Budget and Accounts Act. However, the above Accounting Provisions cannot be viewed as an administrative disposition subject to administrative litigation. Therefore, the court below's above determination is just, and the Corporation is merely a legal entity established by the above Korea Electric Power Corporation Act, and there is no error in the law of misunderstanding the legal principles of Article 70-18, the Enforcement Decree of the Local Finance Act or Article 89 of the Local Finance Act that the defendant's act of participating in the bidding is not an administrative agency or government-invested institutions under private law.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Shin Jong-sung (Presiding Justice)