logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.09.17 2014누40120
국가인권위원회진정기각등처분무효확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasons why the court of first instance should explain are as follows: (a) the reasons why the plaintiff is required to cite the judgment on the argument that the plaintiff emphasizes or re-convened in this court is identical to the reasons of the first instance judgment; and (b) therefore, (c) pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. On October 20, 2010, the Plaintiff filed a petition against the Defendant for a violation of human rights and discriminatory treatment. On July 27, 2011, the Defendant rendered a disposition of rejection and rejection on the ground that the Plaintiff’s petition falls under Articles 39(1)1 and 32(1)5 of the National Human Rights Commission Act.

However, the defendant's rejection of petition and rejection disposition should be regarded as null and void as it has a significant and obvious error as follows:

1) The defendant neglected to accept the plaintiff's petition and explain his/her failure to do so at least nine months after receiving the plaintiff's petition and without any explanation, notified the result of handling the petition. This principle violates Article 4 of the Rules on the Investigation of and Remedy against Violations of Human Rights and the Discriminatory Acts, which must explain the reason to the petitioner in writing if it is inevitable to extend the period. In light of the purport of the Constitution, the Petition Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, the Civil Petitions Treatment Act, the National Assembly Act, etc., the disposition of this case shall be deemed null and void. 2) The non-existence of the ground for rejection was accepted by the 18th National Assembly Speaker of the National Assembly on September 17, 2008, and filed a petition with the defendant as to the fact that the defendant did not receive the notice of the result of handling, and the defendant filed a petition with the court or the Constitutional Court on the facts that caused the petition "the petition" in this part to the court or the Constitutional Court, an investigation by an investigation agency, or any other Act.

arrow