2011Nu20866 Ascertainment of omission

A

Board of Audit

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2010Guhap43969 decided June 2, 2011

October 19, 2011

December 7, 2011

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance court is revoked. The defendant's omission in the civil petition filed by the plaintiff on September 18, 2010 is confirmed to be illegal.

1. cite the judgment of the first instance;

The reasons why the court uses this case are as follows, except for adding the following judgments to the relevant part on the matters asserted by the plaintiff in the trial. The reasons why the court uses this case shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional matters to be determined;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Defendant’s answer to the instant civil petition on October 6, 2010 is contrary to Article 15 of the Civil Petitions Treatment Act, and eventually, the Defendant did not answer to the instant civil petition.

B. Determination

As long as the Defendant sent a reply to the Plaintiff on January 5, 201 to the instant civil petition, regardless of whether the Defendant previously sent a legitimate reply to the instant civil petition, the state of omission in the instant civil petition was resolved.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Judges Kim Jong-dae

Judges Kim Dong-dong

Judge Full-time