logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고법 1985. 8. 23. 선고 85구498 제4특별부판결 : 확정
[퇴직금추가지급신청각하처분취소청구서건][하집1985(3),578]
Main Issues

a disposition subject to an administrative proceeding, where a ruling has been made on a complaint;

Summary of Judgment

A ruling rendered by a ruling authority on an administrative disposition shall not be subject to administrative litigation, unless there are special circumstances to the contrary, and only the original disposition shall be subject to administrative litigation.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 19 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Reference Cases

Seoul High Court Decision 81Nu223 delivered on January 26, 1982 (Gong677No309)

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

Defendant

Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor

Text

The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim

The ruling that the defendant dismissed the plaintiff's application for additional payment of retirement allowances as a library No. 85-16 of May 20, 1985 against the plaintiff shall be revoked. The litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

The plaintiff's ground for the plaintiff's claim was that the plaintiff worked as a daily worker at the sewerage office of the Seoul Metropolitan Government under defendant Busan Metropolitan Government from April 1, 1963 to January 30, 196, and the household was incorporated into the Southern Construction Business Office of the Seoul Metropolitan Government and continued to work until March 15, 1985 and retired from the above office. Thus, although the retirement allowance of the above Southern Construction Business Office was received from the above Southern Construction Business Office, the retirement allowance of 804,670 won of the working period of the above Southern Construction Business Office was not paid at the Southern Construction Business Office of the above Southern Construction Business, and it is difficult to view that the defendant was dismissed on April 24, 1985, and therefore, it is difficult to view that the plaintiff was not subject to administrative litigation as the subject of administrative litigation, and it is difficult to view that the plaintiff was not subject to administrative litigation as the subject of administrative litigation (which is clearly subject to administrative litigation).

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed as unlawful, and the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Jae-ho (Presiding Judge)

arrow