Open Decision Ledger · Constitutional, administrative & state liability
A shopping mall trade suspension as an administrative disposition
Supreme Court, Nov. 29, 2018, 2017Du34940 (judgment)
No holding summary · checked against points at issue. The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Case name: 거래정지처분취소
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Where the Procurement Service, on the ground that a supplier had falsely stated or exaggerated the contents of the specification sheet, notified a six-month suspension of its trading on the Narajangteo integrated shopping mall under the additional special conditions to the purchase contract, was that suspension an administrative disposition subject to administrative litigation?
Holding
It was. Although the measure rested on the additional special conditions, which are a private-law contract, it was an exercise of public authority by an administrative agency, enforcing the law on concrete facts and directly affecting the supplier's rights and duties, so it fell within the scope of administrative litigation. The Supreme Court affirmed the appellate judgment on that point, while noting that a court may examine whether the measure met the trigger conditions set in the additional special conditions and whether it breached the national contract statutes or the principles of equality, proportionality and trust protection, and that the lower court's reasoning based on the principle of reservation of law was not appropriate.
Points at issue, verbatim
위 거래정지 조치는 항고소송의 대상이 되는 행정처분에 해당한다고 본 원심의 판단이 정당하다고 한 사례
Unofficial English translation
a case in which the court below's decision that the above transaction suspension measure corresponds to an administrative disposition subject to appeal litigation was held to be proper
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
상고를 기각한다. 상고비용은 피고가 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed. The defendant shall bear the costs of the final appeal.
Form of the test
Circumstances weighed Stated in the decision
구체적인 경우에 관련 법령의 내용과 취지, 그 행위의 주체·내용·형식·절차, 그 행위와 상대방 등 이해관계인이 입는 불이익 사이의 실질적 견련성, 법치행정의 원리와 그 행위에 관련한 행정청이나 이해관계인의 태도 등을 고려하여 개별적으로 결정하여야 한다
Unofficial English translation
it must be determined on a case-by-case basis in each specific case, taking into consideration the content and purport of the relevant statutes and regulations, the subject, content, form, and procedure of that act, the substantive relevance between that act and the disadvantages suffered by the counterparty or other interested parties, the principle of administration by law, and the attitude of the administrative agency or the interested parties related to that act
Factors
- 갑 주식회사가 조달청과 물품구매계약을 체결하고
- 국가종합전자조달시스템인 나라장터 종합쇼핑몰 인터넷 홈페이지를 통해 납품요구를 하는 수요기관에 제품을 납품하였는데
- 조달청이 ‘규격서 내용을 허위로 기재하거나 과장하였다’는 등의 이유로
- 물품구매계약 추가특수조건 규정에 따라 갑 회사에 대하여 6개월간 나라장터 종합쇼핑몰에서의 거래를 정지한다고 통보한 사안에서
Unofficial English translation
• A Co., Ltd. concluded a goods purchase contract with the Public Procurement Service and
• delivered products to demanding agencies that made delivery requests through the Internet website of the Nara Jangteo General Shopping Mall, the national integrated electronic procurement system, whereas
• the Public Procurement Service, on such grounds as that it had “falsely or exaggeratedly stated the contents of the specification sheet,”
• notified A Co., Ltd. that, in accordance with the provisions of the Additional Special Conditions of the Goods Purchase Contract, transactions on the Nara Jangteo General Shopping Mall would be suspended for six months; in a case where
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2010. 11. 18. 선고 2008두167 전원합의체 판결 등 참조
Unofficial English translation
See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2008Du167 decided November 18, 2010, etc.
Decisions referred to
해당 본문 참조
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
To what extent may a court review a shopping mall trade suspension for proportionality or trust protection when its grounds are set out only in special contractual conditions and a shopping mall notice?
A later decision on the review of sanctions grounded in private-law contracts, or a decision applying the reservation-of-law reasoning the Court set aside here, would call for this entry to be read again. An amendment to Article 22 of the additional special conditions or to Articles 9 and 10 of the shopping mall operation notice, which supply the trigger conditions and the objection procedure, would have the same effect.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-25
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on 7 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 4 (form of the test).
Axis 4 (Form of the test): Primary “Circumstances weighed” vs Independent “Existing test applied”
The primary treats the standard as a holistic consideration of the contract, the mall notice and general principles, while the independent reading applies the facts directly to reach the conclusion on the disposition question.
위 거래정지 조치는 항고소송의 대상이 되는 행정처분에 해당한다고 본 원심의 판단이 정당하다고 한 사례Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Daejeon High Court, in its judgment of 26 January 2017 (2016Nu11801), held that the trade suspension was an administrative disposition subject to administrative litigation. It reasoned that the measure was an adverse and disciplinary disposition directly restricting the plaintiff's property rights, that regulating it through the additional special conditions or the shopping mall operation notice required an express statutory basis, and that a measure made without any such basis breached the principle of reservation of law and was unlawful.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court found no error in the holding on justiciability, since an act of an administrative agency on concrete facts that directly affects the counterparty's rights and duties is a disposition under Article 2(1)(i) of the Administrative Litigation Act. It nevertheless noted, in a passage set apart in the judgment, that even where the measure is justiciable it may be unlawful if it does not meet even the trigger conditions set in the additional special conditions, that a court may examine whether the conduct falls within the grounds for suspension and whether the measure breaches the national contract statutes or the principles of equality, proportionality and trust protection, and that the reasoning of the court below based on the principle of reservation of law was not appropriate. All four Justices agreed, and the appeal was dismissed.
Distinguishing conditions
- A dispute over the conclusion or performance of the purchase contract itself, where no suspension of trading restricts the registrant's position on the shopping mall.
- A refusal to register goods or to designate an excellent government-procured product, since the Court's reasoning turned on the suspension of trading already open to a registered user.
- A measure with no substantial link to the disadvantage the counterparty bears, since the Court decided justiciability case by case with that link and the agency's stance in mind.
Record verification notes
Set the file against the five points the Court weighed: the registrant's legal position under the e-procurement and procurement statutes, the suspension of dealings with demand institutions as well as with the agency, the public interest in the reliability and fairness of the mall, the form of the notice and the pre-notification and objection procedures, and the linked suspension of every contract of the same item name. Then match the grounds invoked, here the additional special conditions Article 22(1)(i) and (xviii), against the items and periods in the schedule to those conditions, and check the version of the additional special conditions and the shopping mall operation notice in force on the date of the measure.
From the official text
Points at issue
갑 주식회사가 조달청과 물품구매계약을 체결하고 국가종합전자조달시스템인 나라장터 종합쇼핑몰 인터넷 홈페이지를 통해 납품요구를 하는 수요기관에 제품을 납품하였는데, 조달청이 ‘규격서 내용을 허위로 기재하거나 과장하였다’는 등의 이유로 물품구매계약 추가특수조건 규정에 따라 갑 회사에 대하여 6개월간 나라장터 종합쇼핑몰에서의 거래를 정지한다고 통보한 사안에서, 위 거래정지 조치는 항고소송의 대상이 되는 행정처분에 해당한다고 본 원심의 판단이 정당하다고 한 사례
Unofficial English translation
A Co., Ltd. concluded a goods purchase contract with the Public Procurement Service and delivered products to demanding agencies that made delivery requests through the Internet website of the Nara Jangteo General Shopping Mall, the national integrated electronic procurement system; in a case where the Public Procurement Service notified A Co., Ltd. that, on such grounds as that it had “falsely or exaggeratedly stated the contents of the specification sheet,” transactions on the Nara Jangteo General Shopping Mall would be suspended for six months in accordance with the provisions of the Additional Special Conditions of the Goods Purchase Contract, a case in which the court below's decision that the above transaction suspension measure corresponds to an administrative disposition subject to appeal litigation was held to be proper
Summary of the holding
The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Order
상고를 기각한다. 상고비용은 피고가 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed. The defendant shall bear the costs of the final appeal.
Provisions referred to
행정소송법 제2조 제1항 제1호
Read 2026-10-25 · Cross-read 2026-10-25. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger