(a) The meaning of final and conclusive power where an administrative disposition or an administrative appeal ruling has become final and conclusive after the lapse of appeal period;

B. Whether the previous disposition to revoke compensation benefits for industrial accidents becomes final and conclusive after the lapse of the objection period (affirmative), and whether the previous disposition to revoke compensation benefits for industrial accidents can seek medical care benefits again (affirmative)

A. Where an administrative disposition or an adjudication on administrative appeal becomes final and conclusive due to the lapse of the appeal period, the final and conclusive power means that a person whose legal interest is infringed upon due to the disposition can no longer dispute the effect of the disposition or the adjudication, and it does not recognize res judicata such as res judicata in the judgment, and thus, the factual or legal judgment, which forms the basis of the disposition, becomes final and conclusive, and the parties or the court cannot make any assertion or judgment inconsistent with

B. Even if the previous disposition to cancel the medical care benefits for industrial accidents becomes final and conclusive due to the lapse of the objection period, the legal relationship that there is no right to claim medical care benefits does not become final and conclusive, and as long as it does not go against the extinctive prescription, another claim for medical care benefits may be filed, and if so,

Article 37 of the Administrative Appeals Act, Article 3 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Business and Examination Act

B. Supreme Court Decision 91Nu10292 delivered on June 11, 1991 (Gong1991, 1935) 92Nu1643 delivered on October 27, 1992 (Gong1992, 3314) 92Nu7542 delivered on December 8, 1992 (Gong193,470)

Plaintiff

The head of the Seoul East Regional Labor Office

Seoul High Court Decision 92Gu13105 delivered on October 8, 1992

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

(1) According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below presumed that a person who has an objection to the insurance benefits under Article 3 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Business and Examination Act files a request for review with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance examiner, and has an objection to the decision, may file an administrative litigation against the person who is dissatisfied with the decision (Paragraph 1), and that a request for review under paragraph 1 is subject to Article 18 of the Administrative Appeals Act and that a request for review may be filed within 60 days from the date the decision on the request for review is known (Paragraph 2). In light of the above, even if the person who received the decision on the insurance benefits from the head of a regional labor office fails to file a request for review within the prescribed period, or even if the request for review and request for review are made within the prescribed period, if the decision on the insurance benefits is not filed, the decision on the insurance benefits can no longer be asserted against the insurance benefits relation with the same cause, and that the plaintiff's request for review and approval on the same cause cannot be asserted as the cancellation of the additional medical care benefits before the plaintiff's request for review.

(2) The Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act does not have any specific provision that limits the exercise of the right to receive insurance benefits, as it does not include any specific provision that restricts the exercise of the right, and the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act was enacted with the aim of ensuring the fairness of insurance benefits by prescribing matters relating to the review of the objection to the insurance benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, and has any special provision different from the Administrative Appeals Act in regard to an administrative appeal to be filed by a person who has an objection to the decision on the insurance benefits, as to the period and procedure of objection, examination (re-examination) under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, and does not have any special provision different from the Administrative Appeals Act in regard to the validity of the disposition on insurance benefits or the decision on examination (re-examination) on the said disposition in relation to the industrial accident compensation insurance benefits. Therefore, if the disposition or the decision on review thereof becomes final and conclusive after the lapse of the objection period, it does not seem to have any special effect

(3) However, in general, in a case where an administrative disposition or an adjudication on an administrative appeal becomes final and conclusive due to the lapse of the appeal period, its final and conclusive power means that a person whose legal interest is infringed on by such disposition can no longer dispute the validity of such disposition or adjudication, and as such, it does not recognize res judicata such as that in a judgment, the factual or legal judgment which forms the basis of such disposition has become final and conclusive and the parties or the court cannot make arguments or judgments inconsistent therewith.

(4) Therefore, even if the previous disposition of revoking industrial accident compensation benefits becomes final and conclusive due to the lapse of the objection period, the legal relation that there is no claim for medical care benefits is not confirmed, and as long as the plaintiff is entitled to a claim for medical care benefits once it does not go against the extinctive prescription, and if it is rejected, it shall be subject to a new rejection disposition. However, the court below rejected the lawsuit, and the decision of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the validity of the cases where the legal principles on the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Business and Examination Act, or general administrative disposition or administrative appeal ruling becomes final and conclusive, and it is clear that such illegality has

(5) The lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Choi Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)