부관에 대한 행정소송의 형식과 문제점 = A Study on the Form and Problem of the Administrative Litigation for Additional Clause

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study has been examined from a critical standpoint the forms of administrative litigation for illegal additional clause that has been thus far discussed theoretically. Traditionally, the administrative law approach to additional clause was carried out according to three methods: ① whether to separate the additional clause from the profitable administrative act and designating it as the subject of litigation; ② under what litigation form is the subject realized; ③ under what standards in the litigation can the law court separate the additional clause from the main administrative act and announce the revocation of the additional clause alone. Although the main administrative act is profitable to the opposite party, if the additional clause has an invasive character, an effective remedy through the elimination of the additional clause can be searched for. However, additional clause excluding the burden can only be regarded as part of the administrative acts with additional clause, and this leads to the problem where the additional clause alone cannot be viewed as an administrative disposition that is the subject of a revocation litigation, and to this, theory tries to overcome the problem with the litigation of impure partial revocation.
However, the litigation of impure partial revocation looks very much like the litigation of pure partial revocation, making distinguishing difficult. The plaintiff to the litigation of impure partial revocation is arguing that only the unlawful additional clause is illegal and seeks its revocation, but conceptually, the entire administrative act with the additional clause is viewed as the subject of the litigation, placing it in contradiction to the theory on the object of lawsuit of traditional revocation litigation. Also, according to the Supreme Court’s precedent on the object of the lawsuit for revocation litigation, the revocation of the additional clause alone, which is inextricably linked to the administrative disposition, cannot be recognized in a lawsuit.
Therefore, litigation of impure partial revocation cannot be viewed as an effective means of remedy. Instead, if an illegal additional clause is added to the administrative disposition, it would be more rational if the people applied for changes for administrative disposition in which there are no additional clause, or there are changes to the content of the additional clause, and if the administrative agency rejects the changes, to propose a litigation for revocation regarding the disposition of refusal.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 김동희, "행정행위의 부관에 관한 고찰" 서울대학교 법학연구소 36 (36): 1995
• 2 이승훈, "행정처분의 일부취소" 안암법학회 (29) : 39-67, 2009
• 3 하명호, "행정쟁송법" 박영사 2013
• 4 이일세, "행정법총론" 법문사 2022
• 5 홍정선, "행정법원론(상)(" 박영사 2022
• 6 류지태, "행정법신론" 박영사 2021
• 7 김용섭, "행정법상 일부취소" 행정법이론실무학회 (23) : 1-40, 2009
• 8 정하중, "행정법개론" 법문사 2021
• 9 김남진, "행정법Ⅰ" 법문사 2019
• 10 김철용, "행정법" 고시계사 2022
• 11 "행정구제법" 사법연수원 2012
• 12 김민섭, "취소소송의 소송물과 부관에 대한 권리구제" 법학연구소 31 (31): 361-403, 2019
• 13 석종현, "일반행정법총론" 2020
• 14 이광윤, "일반행정법" 법문사 2012
• 15 김용섭, "위법한 부관에 대한 행정소송" 대한변호사협회 (423) : 25-42, 2012
• 16 전극수, "위법한 부관과 행정소송* - 판례와 소송실무를 중심으로 -" 한국토지공법학회 41 : 207-227, 2008
• 17 홍강훈, "신소송물이론의 이원설에 근거한 부관의 독립쟁송가능성 및 독립취소가능성에 관한 연구" 한국공법학회 44 (44): 373-405, 2015
• 18 이상천, "부진정일부취소소송의 성립가능성론에 대한 비판적 고찰" 법학연구소 17 (17): 27-51, 2013
• 19 신봉기, "부관에 대한 사법심사" 한국토지공법학회 9 : 2000
• 20 "법원실무제요 「행정」" 법원행정처 2016
• 21 "민사실무Ⅰ" 사법연수원 2009
• 22 김중권, "김중권의 行政法" 법문사 2021
• 23 이일세, "공법학의 현대적 지평(계희열박사 화갑기념논문집)" 1995
• 24 이상천, "附款 統制로서의 진정일부취소소송 활용에 관한 小考" 법학연구소 14 (14): 619-648, 2013
• 25 김동희, "行政法Ⅰ" 박영사 2018
• 26 이시윤, "新民事訴訟法" 박영사 2017