2018Nu7280 Action Demanding revocation of Disposition of Redemption of Research Expenses

A

Law Firm Bululul, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

[Defendant-Appellant]

The Minister of Science and ICT

Standa type of the litigation performer, leapification

Law Firm Gyeong-tae, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Attorney Lee Jae-ju

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2017Guhap72003 decided October 25, 2018

April 11, 2019

May 2, 2019

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The Defendant’s national research on July 3, 2017 on the Industry-Academic Cooperation Foundation of the B University shall be revoked.

The disposition of recovery of KRW 245,928,963 for research funds as a disposition of development project sanctions shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The grounds alleged by the plaintiff in the trial while filing an appeal do not differ from the contents alleged by the plaintiff in the first instance court, and even if the evidence submitted in the first instance court is re-examineed along with the plaintiff's assertion, the first instance court's judgment dismissing the plaintiff'

Therefore, the reasoning for this case is as follows: “The instant management regulations amended by Presidential Decree No. 23788, May 14, 2012; [Attachment Table 5] are newly prepared and newly prepared to “detailed standards for the redemption of project costs by reason” (where research and development is conducted by fraud or other improper means, where research and development is conducted by fraud or other improper means)” as one of the grounds for restitution. The purpose of this case is to make it reasonable to recover research and development expenses by preparing the standards for redemption of research and development expenses by preparing research and development expenses for each type of violation. Article 11(3) of the former Framework Act on Science and Technology provides that “The Government shall promote national research and development projects transparently and fairly and efficiently, manage national research and development projects, and impose obligations to determine the planning, public announcement, etc. of national research and development projects, the selection of national research and development project tasks, agreement, etc., and so forth, it is difficult to view the additional scope of redemption of research and development expenses as being transparent and fair under Article 17(1)2) of the Civil Procedure Act.”

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

The presiding judge, the whole judge;

Judges Min Il-young

Judge Lee Jin-hun