Requirements for direct disposition by a ruling authority under Article 37 (2) of the Administrative Appeals Act.

In accordance with Article 37(2) of the Administrative Appeals Act and Article 27-2(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the pertinent administrative agency should have failed to take any disposition in spite of a ruling ordering the execution of the disposition in order for the pertinent ruling agency to take a direct disposition. Thus, if the pertinent administrative agency made any disposition, even though the disposition does not comply with the contents of the ruling, the ruling agency cannot take any direct disposition

Article 37(2) of the Administrative Appeals Act and Article 27-2(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Administrative Appeals Act

Limited Liability Company Gender Equality Industry

Governor of Jeollabuk-do

Gwangju High Court Decision 2000Nu450 delivered on October 13, 2000

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

In accordance with Article 37(2) of the Administrative Appeals Act and Article 27-2(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the pertinent administrative agency should have failed to take any disposition in spite of a ruling ordering the execution of the disposition in order for the pertinent ruling agency to take a direct disposition. Thus, if the pertinent administrative agency made any disposition, even though the disposition does not comply with the contents of the ruling, the ruling agency cannot take any direct disposition

In the same purport, the court below is just in holding that the defendant cannot make a direct disposition on the ground that the defendant was a disposition of the Kim Jong-si market after the defendant's ruling, and there is no error in law

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Yong-woo (Presiding Justice)