logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.3.8. 선고 2016누61091 판결
체당금반환및추가징수처분취소
Cases

2016Nu61091 Return of substitute payments and revocation of disposition of additional collection

Plaintiff-Appellant

A

Defendant Appellant

The head of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office Seoul East Site

The first instance judgment

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2014Guhap57898 decided July 21, 2016

Conclusion of Pleadings

November 30, 2016

Imposition of Judgment

March 8, 2017

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s disposition of return of substitute payment and additional collection made on February 6, 2014 by the Plaintiff is revoked.

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

Reasons

1. Quotation of the first instance judgment

The grounds for the Defendant’s assertion in the trial while filing an appeal are not significantly different from the contents of the Defendant’s assertion in the first instance court, and the judgment of the first instance court that cited the Defendant’s assertion is justifiable. The grounds for the reasoning of this case are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the dismissal of some contents as follows. Thus, this is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

- Part 5 of the first instance judgment, in Part 4, "the judgment of innocence was pronounced (Seoul Central District Court 2014 High Court 2014 High Court 2553)" is that "the prosecutor appealeds from the judgment of innocence (Seoul Central District Court 2014 High Court 2014 High Court 2553) but the appeal was dismissed (Seoul Central District Court 2016No1998), and the prosecutor re-appeals, but the appeal was dismissed (Supreme Court 2016Do14284) and the judgment of innocence became final and conclusive."

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the first instance judgment is just and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Judges

Mobilization by the presiding judge

Judges, leap, and whose name and seal are impossible to be affixed.

The presiding judge

Judges

Judge Lee Jae-soo

arrow