1. All appeals by the plaintiffs and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

purport, purport, and.

The reasoning for this part of the judgment of this court is as stated in the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for changing the list No. 1, the annexed list No. 2, and the annexed list No. 3 from among the judgment of the court of first instance to the annexed list No. 1, and the annexed list No. 2, and the annexed list No. 3. 3.

The judgment of the court on this safety defense is that the lawsuit for cash settlement money is a party suit under public law, and thus, the lawsuit of this case filed as a civil lawsuit is unlawful.

In a case where a party suit under the Administrative Litigation Act is instituted by mistake as a civil suit, if the court of the lawsuit has jurisdiction over the party suit at the same time, it shall be examined in accordance with the procedures prescribed by the Administrative Litigation Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Da41383, Nov. 26, 2009; 97Da42250, Nov. 26, 199). Unlike the case where a case to be instituted as an appeal suit under the Administrative Litigation Act is instituted by mistake as a civil suit, the court of the lawsuit does not require the plaintiff to revise the lawsuit.

In addition, it is not an illegal cause that it affects the trial procedure because it is a matter of the internal division of affairs of the court of the lawsuit, which is judged by the administration of the court of the lawsuit.

However, since the Suwon District Court, which is the first instance court of this case, has jurisdiction over the case of this case as a party suit under the Administrative Litigation Act, it cannot be deemed that there was a mistake in violation of the jurisdiction of the first instance court. Thus, regardless of whether the lawsuit of this case is a party suit under the Administrative Litigation Act, the above argument by

If the lawsuit in this case is a party suit under the Administrative Litigation Act, and if the first instance court did not examine according to the procedure applicable to the party suit under the Administrative Litigation Act, there is an error of procedural violation.