(a) Where an administrative disposition is a beneficial disposition or is made in the same manner as the application, whether there is a benefit to seek the revocation thereof;

(b) The case holding that there is no benefit for the seller to seek revocation of the disposition of land transaction permission taken according to an application based on a final judgment ordering the implementation of the procedure for application

A. In a case where an administrative disposition is a beneficial disposition or is made in accordance with the application, the other party to the disposition cannot be deemed to have infringed on the other party’s rights or legal interests. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the other party to the disposition shall be deemed to have no benefit

B. The case holding that since the seller did not implement the procedure for registration of transfer of ownership following the sale of land against the seller and applied for land transaction permission in the joint name of the buyer and the seller in favor of the buyer by filing a lawsuit against the seller for the performance of the procedure for registration of transfer of ownership following the sale of land, the seller was also the applicant and the contents of the disposition were also the applicant, and the seller did not violate any right or the legal interest protected

(b) Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act (amended by Act No. 4572 of Aug. 5, 1993) and Article 21-3 of the former Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory

A. Supreme Court Decision 82Nu55 Decided September 14, 1982 (Gong1982, 964) 90Nu6774 Decided January 29, 1991 (Gong191, 855)

Plaintiff

Gyeonggi-do Macheon-gun

Seoul High Court Decision 93Gu13881 delivered on April 27, 1994

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

All costs of a lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

We examine ex officio.

If an administrative disposition is a beneficial disposition or a disposition made in accordance with the application, the other party to the disposition shall not be deemed to have infringed on the other party's rights or legal interests. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the other party to the disposition shall be deemed to have no

According to the records, the land transaction permission disposition of this case was conducted by the non-party who sold part of the land of this case to the non-party 1, etc. but did not follow the procedure for the registration of transfer of ownership. The non-party brought a lawsuit against the plaintiff for the implementation of the procedure for the registration of land transaction contract and received a favorable judgment and filed an application under the joint name of the non-party and the plaintiff. Thus, the land transaction permission disposition of this case was also the plaintiff, and the contents of the disposition also were the plaintiff's application. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the plaintiff

Therefore, even though the lawsuit of this case should have been dismissed because there is no legal interest in seeking its revocation, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the interest in the lawsuit in the administrative litigation.

Therefore, without examining the grounds of appeal, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the members are directly decided. The lawsuit of this case is dismissed, and the total costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the losing plaintiff. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)