logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.10.07 2020누42912
호봉재획정거부처분 취소
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. On July 6, 2018, the Defendant’s refusal to re-determine the salary grade against the Plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

2. Whether the disposition of the instant case is legitimate

A. The plaintiffs' assertion;

B. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the relevant statutes is that the relevant part of the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the relevant part of the judgment, except for adding “each of the statements in the evidence Nos. 1 through 6” to “No. 28, 2018,” which read “No. 28, 2018,” which read “No. 2, 2018,” which read “No. 3, 2018,” which read “No. 12, 2018,” and “No. 11, 2018

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

C. 1) As a matter of principle, the relevant provisions and legal principles are the universal norms of society having the same binding force against many and unspecified persons, in interpreting them, they should clarify the standard meaning of the law and make it objectively reasonable, and as much as possible, ensure that legal stability is not undermined by maintaining consistency acceptable to all the people.

On the other hand, since the law is prepared in consideration of universal and typical matters, it is also required to interpret that the law can be the most appropriate solution to the specific case in application of the law in various cases that occur in society reality.

In short, the purpose of legal interpretation should be to find concrete feasibility to the extent that it does not undermine legal stability.

In order to do so, as a matter of principle, a systematic and logical interpretation method that takes into account the legislative intent and purpose, legislative history, harmony with the entire legal order, relationship with other Acts and subordinate statutes, etc. should be additionally adopted to the extent possible, and a reasonable interpretation that satisfies the request for interpretation of the law should be met.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Da83431 Decided January 17, 2013). (B) Article 47(1) of the State Public Officials Act provides matters concerning public officials’ salary class and promotion.

arrow