beta
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
Seoul High Court-2017-Nu-7398 (2018.03)
Title
A revocation suit against a non-existent administrative disposition is illegal because there is no interest in the lawsuit.
Summary
If an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition shall lose its validity, and no longer exists, and a lawsuit seeking revocation against a non-existent administrative disposition is illegal as there is no interest in the lawsuit, and thus, it is revoked ex officio in accordance with the purport of the judgment of the court below. Thus, it is illegal as there
Related statutes
Article 60 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act:
Cases
Supreme Court Decision 2018Du52082 Decided revocation of Disposition of Gift Tax
Plaintiff-Appellee
Yang-○
Defendant-Appellant
Head of △ District Office
Judgment of the lower court
Seoul High Court Decision 2017Nu73398 Decided July 3, 2018
Imposition of Judgment
July 3, 2018
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.
All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.
Reasons
Judgment ex officio is made.
When an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition shall lose its validity and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Du18202, Dec. 13, 2012).
The record reveals the fact that the Defendant revoked the instant disposition ex officio in accordance with the purport of the lower judgment after filing an appeal of this case. Therefore, the instant lawsuit is seeking revocation of a disposition that had not been extinguished and thus, it was unlawful as it did not have any interest in the lawsuit.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and this case is sufficient for the Supreme Court to directly render a judgment. The judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the lawsuit of this case is dismissed, and the defendant bears the burden pursuant to Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.