beta
Plaintiff and appellant
Plaintiff 1 and one other (Attorney Yoon Young-ju, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)
Defendant, Appellant
Law Firm Good Faith
Conclusion of Pleadings
June 10, 2010
The first instance judgment
Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2009Guhap26531 Decided October 9, 2009
Text
1. The lawsuit of this case is dismissed by the exchange in this court.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiffs through the first and second instances.
Purport of claim and appeal
On January 4, 2007, No. 2007, a notarial deed prepared by the Defendant (No. 5, 2007) confirms that the deed is null and void (the plaintiff filed a claim against the Minister of Justice in the first instance trial and changed the defendant in exchange for the lawsuit by changing the defendant in the trial).
Reasons
1. The plaintiffs asserted that the notarial deed written in the purport of the claim made between the plaintiff 1 and the non-party as a party to the contract was prepared in violation of the Notary Public Act and sought a confirmation of invalidity of the said notarial deed, and the defendant asserted that the lawsuit in this case
2. The term "administrative disposition", which is the object of an appeal litigation, means an act of an administrative agency under public law, which causes direct changes in the specific rights and obligations of citizens, such as ordering the establishment of rights or the burden of obligations with respect to a specific matter, or giving rise to other legal effects (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Du18362, Sept. 11, 2008). However, authentication by notary public Act does not in itself result in changes in the relationship of rights, and it does not result in direct changes in the specific rights and obligations of citizens. Thus, the preparation of authentic deeds cannot be deemed an administrative disposition that is the object of an appeal lawsuit.
3. If so, the instant lawsuit is unlawful and thus dismissed (the judgment of the court of first instance became null and void due to the exchange change of litigation at the trial) and it is so decided as per Disposition.
Judges Park Poe-dae (Presiding Judge) Lee Jae-hoon