일반 행정법상 당초처분과 감액처분의 법리 검토 - 대법원 2012. 9. 27. 선고 2011두27247 판결을 중심으로 -

In Sep. 27. 2012, in case of amount obtained by unjust enrichment, the Supreme Court sentenced that the object of litigation between a beginning administrative measure and a follow-up reduced administrative measure is a beginning measure reduced by the follow-up measure, and that the starting point of period of litigation is a beginning administrative measure. The above precedent principle coincides with the principle that the Supreme Court sentenced in the case of tax, penalty and development charge litigation. But the above principle does not coincide with the Supreme Court's another principle that the meaning of a administrative measure should be interpreted by the contents of administrative measure documents. And the above principle betrays the responsible person's trust that is made by disposition agency who gives the person another deadline for payment or notifies the objection methods when he disposes the following-up reduced administrative measure. And the above principle is too difficult to be understanded by public people, so it does not contribute to the safeguard of the public's rights. And in terms of period of litigation, the above principle does not protect the responsible person's right of procedure on the merits of a case. And it is wrong to judge the beginning administrative measure's legality by the resons that is confirmed illegal through the follow-up reduced administrative measure. So I think it is right that the object of litigation between a beginning administrative measure and a follow-up reduced administrative measure is a follow-up reduced administrative measure, and that the starting point of period of litigation is the follow-up reduced one.