ENGLISH

- A procedure under which the relevant parties are, for the purpose of clarifying the factual relationships that are disputed and the legal relationships associated with them, informed of related parties’ arguments or counterarguments, and under which various evidence and material that justify such arguments are gathered and examined, is called a “review”.

- The administrative appeal commission handles the review of administrative appeals. Review begins when a written administrative appeal is submitted or referred to the administrative appeals commission.

- The administrative appeals commission specifies a review date ex officio (Article 38 (1) of the Administrative Appeals Act).

- The review date is modified by the administrative appeals commission ex officio or at the application of the relevant party (Article 38 (2) of the Administrative Appeals Act).

- If the review date is modified, the administrative appeals commission shall inform the parties of that fact and of its grounds without delay (Article 38 (3) of the Administrative Appeals Act).

- Notification of the review date or notification of a modification of the review date may be made in writing or may use simple notification methods, such as a telephone call to the number set out in the written appeal, sending of a text message to a cellular phone, or by facsimile or email (Article 38 (4) of the Administrative Appeals Act).

- In a review of requirements, the relevant appeal is reviewed as to whether it meets the requirements for an appeal. If, as a result of the review, the appeal is found to be unlawful on the basis that it does not meet the requirements for an appeal, that appeal is dismissed without prejudice.

- If the appeal is not lawful but is deemed to be capable of correction, the administrative appeals commission may set a time period and require its correction; provided that, matters that are trivial may be corrected by the commission ex officio (Article 32 (1) of the Administrative Appeals Act).

- If as a result of the review of the requirements the administrative appeal is found to be lawful, in a review on the merits, the administrative disposition's illegality or injustice is reviewed.

- If as a result of the review on the merits it is found that there are proper grounds for the appellant's appeal, an acceptance ruling is made and, if it is groundless, a dismissal ruling is made.

- Administrative appeals adopt the adversarial system. The “adversarial system” is a system under which reviews are conducted through the offense and defense of the opposing parties to the dispute.

- The administrative appeals commission requires the appellant and appellee to submit their methods of offense and defense, and conducts its review on the basis of the methods of offense and defense that have been submitted (Article 23, Article 24, Article 33 and Article 34 of the Administrative Appeals Act).

- The “inquisitorial system” is a system under which the administrative appeals commission conducts reviews ex officio, and at the same time, gathers the necessary material.

- The administrative appeals commission may, if it is necessary for the review of the case, review facts which have not been argued by the parties, question the parties and persons for reference ex officio, and may request appraisals and verifications, etc. from experts (Article 39 and Article 36 of the Administrative Appeals Act).

- The administrative appeals commission's review is carried out either as an oral review or a written review (The main body of Article 40 (1) of the of the Administrative Appeals Act).

- If any of the parties request an oral review, the administrative appeals commission shall, unless a written review is deemed sufficient on its own for the decision, conduct an oral review (Proviso to Article 40 (1) of the Administrative Appeals Act).

- Remarks made by the members of the administrative appeals commission at its meetings, and other matters falling under one of the following, the disclosure of which may have an adverse effect on the fairness of the administrative appeals commission's review and decision, are not disclosed to the public (Article 41 of the Administrative Appeals Act and Article 29 of the Enforcement Decree of the Administrative Appeals Act):

- If it is necessary for the review of the case, the administrative appeals commission may, ex officio or at the application of the relevant party, conduct an examination of evidence using the following methods (Article 36 (1) of the Administrative Appeals Act):

- The administrative appeals commission may, if necessary, conduct the examination of evidence by entrusting it to the personnel of the administrative agency under whose jurisdiction the commission is established, or to another administrative agency (Article 36 (2) of the Administrative Appeals Act).

- If multiple appeal cases have been filed in respect of identical or connected issues, or if it is deemed to be necessary because of factors such as the cases being concerned with similar dispositions by the same administrative agency, the administrative appeals commission may, in view of the expediency or economy of review, review the cases by consolidating them, or review connected appeals that have been consolidated by separating them (Article 37 of the Administrative Appeals Act).

- An appellant or intervenor in an appeal may, prior to a ruling on the appeal, withdraw the appeal in writing (Article 42 (1) and (2) of the Administrative Appeals Act).