Whether the consolidation of litigation under Article 7 of the Administrative Litigation Act requires that the administrative litigation be lawful or not.

Since the consolidation of related litigation under Article 7 of the Administrative Litigation Act requires that the administrative litigation, the original litigation, is legitimate, if the administrative litigation is dismissed on the ground that it is illegal, the combined claim should also be dismissed.

Article 7 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Supreme Court Decision 65Gu25 Decided May 31, 1965

[Judgment of the court below]

Do Governor of Do;

Daegu High Court Decision 76Gu144 delivered on February 16, 1978

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.

With respect to No. 1:

With respect to the plaintiff's claim for the construction of the river structure as stated in the judgment of the court below, the construction of the river structure is a repair work within 750 meters in the 7,000 meters in the 200s in the 19,740,000 won in the 750 meters in the 200s in the 200s in the 200s in the 200s in the 200s in the 200s in the 19,740s in the 200s in the 200s in the 200s in the 200s in the 200s in the 200s in the 200s in the 200s in the 200s in the 19,750s in the 200s in the 200s in the 200s in the 20s in the 2006s in the 1976.

On the other hand, the examination of evidence at the time of the decision of the court below reveals that the above fact-finding of the court below is acceptable, the decision of the court below is just, and the construction has not been completed at the time of the submission of this gushe, and the judgment of the court below cannot be deemed to be unlawful, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the interest of protection of rights

The issue is groundless.

With respect to the second ground:

In this case, it can be seen that the plaintiff filed a consolidation of the conjunctive damages and the claim for return of unjust enrichment on the ground that it was related to the administrative litigation of the above principal claimant pursuant to Article 7 of the Administrative Litigation Act. Since the consolidation of related litigation as provided in the above Article requires the administrative litigation, which is the original litigation, to be legitimate, the administrative litigation, and so long as the lawsuit as to the above principal claim seeking the cancellation of the above cancellation of permission is illegal and dismissed as above, the court below's decision to the same purport is just and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles in the judgment of the court below (refer to the judgment of 65Nu25 delivered on May 31, 1965).

The essay is groundless.

Therefore, the appeal is 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.

Justices Yu Tae-hee (Presiding Justice)