Whether the rejection or return of an application by a transit agency constitutes an administrative disposition subject to an appeal litigation (negative)

The sole institution that confirms that a patriot is a bereaved family member of a patriot is the Defense Board, and even if that Committee receives the above application through the Head of the Defense Agency or the Director of the Defense Agency, etc. for convenience, since it is merely an institution via the above application, even if the above Chief of the Defense Agency or the subordinate officer refuses to accept or returns the application after examining and determining whether the above application satisfies the substantial requirements, the above measures are mere factual acts in violation of the law, and do not constitute an administrative disposition subject to appeal, and thus, it cannot file a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the above rejection or return measures.

Article 3(2) and Article 4 of the Act on the Special Support for Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State; Article 13 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Special Support for Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State; Article 25 of the Military Support Act

Plaintiff

Minister of Defense;

Seoul High Court Decision 83Gu167 delivered on August 22, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Judgment ex officio is made.

In full view of the provisions of Article 1, Article 2 subparag. 1, Article 3(2), Article 4 of the Act on the Special Protection of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State, Article 13 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 25 of the Military Protection Act, the bereaved family members of a patriot who intend to receive pension, allowance, or other compensation provided for in the Act on the Special Protection of Persons of Distinguished Services to the State as the bereaved family members of a patriot shall be confirmed as being eligible for the application of the same Act in the order of priority given in the above, among the children and grandchildren of family heir and grandchildren on January 2, 198, who are related to the deceased veterans.

Therefore, even if the Defense Board receives the above application through the Defense Board or its exhibition hall for convenience, since it is merely a body in compliance with the above application, the Defense Board or its exhibition hall cannot determine whether a patriot is a bereaved family member of a patriot subject to illegal application, and as long as there is no formal defect in the application form, it may not refuse to accept the application or return the application to the applicant, and even if the Defense Board or its exhibition officer refuses to receive it or returned the application after examining and determining whether the application satisfies the substantive requirements of the above application, such measures are merely a mere fact contrary to the law and do not constitute an administrative disposition subject to appeal litigation, and thus, it cannot file a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the above rejection or return measure.

According to the records, the head of the Seoul Northern Family Branch, which is the defendant's wedding, received the application for confirmation of bereaved family members of the plaintiff's deceased deceased deceased deceased deceased deceased deceased deceased deceased deceased deceased deceased family, and it is recognized that the plaintiff did not forward the above application to the original family council and returned it to the plaintiff on the substantial grounds that the plaintiff cannot become the deceased deceased deceased deceased deceased family member, and the return of the above application cannot be deemed as falling under the administrative disposition subject to administrative litigation, so the lawsuit seeking its revocation shall

However, the court below rejected the lawsuit seeking revocation by deeming the return measures as administrative disposition. In this regard, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on administrative disposition, which is the object of the administrative litigation, but such errors did not affect the judgment of the court below which dismissed the lawsuit, and therefore, it should be justified.

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 Shin Jong-sung (Presiding Justice)