The case holding that the retirement age of public officials under the State Public Officials Act at the time of transfer shall be applied to a person who is appointed as a public official at the time of the establishment of the Korea Telecommunication Corporation while serving as a public official by the Ministry of Communications, and that his retirement age shall not be deemed to have been extended as a matter of course on the ground that his retirement age was extended by the amendment

The case holding that the retirement age of public officials under the State Public Officials Act at the time of transfer shall be applied to a person who is appointed as a public official at the time of the establishment of the Korea Telecommunication Corporation while serving as a public official by the Ministry of Communications, and that his retirement age shall not be deemed to have been extended as a matter of course on the ground that the retirement age was extended by the amendment of

Article 70(1)3 and Article 74 of the State Public Officials Act, Addenda to the Korea Telecommunication Corporation Act ( May 12, 1986), paragraph(3) of the State Public Officials Act

Plaintiff 1 and four others, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Korea Telecommunication Corporation Law Firm, the Central Patent Office, Attorneys Hab-soo et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellee)

Seoul High Court Decision 92Na4897 delivered on May 19, 1992

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The reasoning of the judgment of the first instance cited by the court below

The court below acknowledged the fact that the plaintiffs were appointed as employees of the defendant Corporation under Article 10 of the Addenda of the State Public Officials Act as public officials from office under the provision of Article 70 (1) 3 of the State Public Officials Act upon the enactment and enforcement of the Korea Telecommunication Corporation Act on January 1, 1982 when the plaintiffs were employed as public officials of the Ministry of Information and Communication, and they were newly employed as employees of the Ministry of Information and Communication under the provision of Article 70 (1) 3 of the State Public Officials Act. The above Korea Telecommunication Corporation Act and the Articles of incorporation, personnel regulations, etc. were employed as public officials of the Ministry of Information and Communication and Communication, and upon the designation of the Minister of Information and Communication, they were employed as employees of the Ministry of Information and Communication and Communication, at the retirement age of the public officials of the Ministry of Information and Communication, when the retirement age of the defendant Corporation is longer than the retirement age of the public officials under the State Public Officials Act, the court below rejected the plaintiffs' retirement age of the above changed public officials under the State Public Officials Act.

In light of all the evidence shown in the record and the relevant laws and regulations, the above fact-finding and judgment of the court below are just, and there is no error of law such as incomplete deliberation or misunderstanding of legal principles.

In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs' assertion that the effect of dismissal of public officials should be denied and the status of public officials should be held as they are, on the ground that they succeeded to the legal relationship without receiving all of the retirement allowances to be received as public officials belonging to the body at the time of the above transfer. However, this is deemed to have been done through the transfer of retirement benefits related to construction work (transfer) under Article 50 of the Public Officials Pension Act, and it is entirely irrelevant to the occurrence of the retirement effect of public officials. Therefore, the argument is without merit.

Therefore, all appeals are 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 on the bench.

Justices Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice) Kim Sang-ho (Presiding Justice)