2017Du75927 Revocation of a disposition to repay project costs, etc.

B

Attorney Lee Jin-bok, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

The Minister of Education

Law Firm Loplus et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Attorney Park Dong-sik, Attorneys Lee Dong-sik, Lee In-bok, and Doz.

Seoul High Court Decision 2017Nu71804 Decided November 30, 2017

January 16, 2020

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

The lower court determined that each of the dispositions of the instant case was unlawful since it was against the principle of proportionality and abused discretion, since the Plaintiff’s subsidization of each of the project costs of the instant case is too unfavorable for the Plaintiff compared to the public interest to be achieved in light of the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, and used as its reasoning in the joint management by returning part of the personnel expenses from the student researchers participating in each of the instant projects through his employees under his direction and supervision.

Examining the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the scope of discretion, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion

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

Justices Cho Jong-hee

Justices Min Min-young

The chief Justice Justice shall mobilized