2026년 제14회 행정사2차 행정절차론 기출해설특강 #이현우행정사 #가장빠른 #합격의법학원

Summary

Lee Hyun-woo reviews the 14th Administrative Procedure Theory exam and explains how to approach each question. He considers the paper relatively accessible and balanced, covering familiar topics. However, because grading is comparative, simply identifying the main legal points may not be enough. Answers are more likely to score well when they explain the rules precisely, apply them to the facts, and reach a clear conclusion.

He advises examinees not to draw firm conclusions about passing or failing before results are released. For future preparation, he emphasizes that case-based answers should do more than briefly state the relevant rules: candidates should identify the issues, explain the governing law and precedents, apply them to the facts, and conclude.

Exam Questions and Key Lessons

Question 1: Beneficial Dispositions

The question raised two separate procedural issues under the Administrative Procedure Act.

Opportunity to Supplement an Application

• An agency must request supplementation when an application has defects that can be readily corrected, such as missing documents or a simple omission.
• This principle may apply to certain substantive defects as well as formal or procedural ones, but the defect must be readily remediable.
• An agency is generally not required to allow an applicant to revise a business plan or satisfy substantive requirements when the problem cannot be easily corrected.
• On the facts presented, the instructor’s main conclusion is that the alleged failure to provide an opportunity to supplement does not make the applicant’s claim valid. The conclusion could differ if the defect were readily correctable.

Missing the Statutory Processing Period

• Agencies should set and announce processing periods and may extend them when necessary, provided they notify the applicant of the reason and expected completion date.
• Certain periods may be excluded from the calculation, including time needed for supplementation, consultations, inspections, or other necessary procedures.
• The instructor describes the processing period as a provisional rule intended to ensure timely handling. Under the case-law position he discusses, exceeding the period does not, by itself, make the disposition unlawful or subject to cancellation.
• The instructor therefore concludes that the applicant’s claim is not valid, assuming the relevant procedural details do not change the result.

Answer-writing method: Briefly state the issue, set out the statutory rule and relevant precedent, explain which defects require supplementation, apply the rule to the facts, and state a conclusion. For the processing-period issue, address extensions and excluded time before applying the precedent.

Question 2: On-Site Administrative Investigations and Replacing an Investigator

The question concerned a business that received advance notice of an on-site investigation and requested a different investigator because the investigator had previously had a dispute with the business owner.

• An on-site investigation involves an investigator entering a home, office, or workplace.
• The agency generally must give advance notice—described in the lecture as at least seven days—stating matters such as the date, time, place, purpose, documents to be produced, and the investigator’s name.
• Investigations are generally conducted between sunrise and sunset. The instructor also discusses exceptions, including consent or unavoidable circumstances, and notes that investigators must carry and present identification.
• A person may submit a written request to the head of the agency to replace an investigator when circumstances make it difficult to expect a fair investigation.
• The agency must review the request. If it finds the reason valid, it assigns another investigator; if not, it rejects the request and gives notice. A request made to delay the investigation may also be rejected.
• The instructor considers an unspecified dispute during school days potentially too subjective, on its own, to justify replacement. Whether the reason is sufficient depends on the seriousness and circumstances of the dispute. The answer should apply the facts rather than simply recite the statute.

Answer-writing method: Treat the problem as a case study. Explain the investigation rules, set out the replacement procedure and standard, and then evaluate whether the particular past dispute objectively undermines impartiality.

Question 3: Birth Registration

The question asked for the deadline and required information for registering a child’s birth.

• The instructor calculates the deadline as one month after the birth. For a child born on September 14, 2026, the report should be filed by October 14, 2026.
• A late report may result in a fine.
• The answer should identify the information to be entered, including:
  • The child’s name, family name, sex, and registration standard;
  • The child’s date and place of birth, and time of birth where applicable;
  • The parents’ names and other identifying details, including resident registration numbers;
  • The child’s status as born within marriage, where relevant; and
  • The birth certificate as an attachment.
• The lecture describes birth registration as a self-contained report and mentions who may be responsible for reporting and where the report may be filed. These are supplementary points; the instructor emphasizes the one-month deadline and required particulars as the most important elements.

Answer-writing method: Use the family details in the fact pattern rather than giving only a generic list. State the deadline, identify the required entries, and apply them to the child in the question.

Question 4: Partial Disclosure and Remedies Under the Information Disclosure Act

• The general principle is to disclose requested information unless it falls within a non-disclosure category.
• If a record contains both disclosable and non-disclosable material, the disclosable portion should be released if the two can be separated without violating procedural requirements.
• The lecture describes a general disclosure decision period of ten days, with an extension of up to ten additional days.
• If the requester receives a non-disclosure or partial-disclosure decision, or receives no response within the relevant period, the instructor outlines three possible routes:
  • Apply to the agency for reconsideration;
  • File an administrative appeal; or
  • Bring an administrative lawsuit.
• The lecture states that an application to the agency should be made within 30 days. The agency’s deliberation committee generally reviews it within seven days, with a possible extension of up to seven days. The instructor also identifies circumstances in which further deliberation may not be held.
• Administrative appeal and litigation are presented as alternative routes: the requester does not always need to use the agency-application process before proceeding to another route. The instructor refers to the applicable appeal and lawsuit deadlines as periods running from awareness of the decision, but the auto-generated subtitles make some exact deadline figures unclear.

Broader Exam and Study Advice

• The instructor considers the exam broadly balanced, with many topics covered in mock exams or appearing in other examinations.
• Since grading is relative, candidates should give clear, detailed answers rather than rely on a bare list of legal rules. For case-based questions, they should make the factual application explicit and reach a definite conclusion.
• He reports that some candidates wrote substantially more than others and cautions that recognizing the key points alone may not be enough to stand out.
• For future preparation, he recommends prioritizing:
  1. The Administrative Procedure Act, including important precedents;
  2. The Information Disclosure Act;
  3. Updated provisions of the Personal Information Protection Act and the Framework Act on Administrative Regulations;
  4. The Act on the Regulation of Violations of Public Order and the Framework Act on Administrative Investigations;
  5. The law concerning restrictions on residents or citizens mentioned in the lecture; and
  6. The Resident Registration Act and Family Relations Registration Act, if time permits.
• He predicts that recurring Information Disclosure Act questions may appear again and that amended laws may attract questions. These are study forecasts, not guaranteed exam topics.
• He closes by thanking students for their work and wishing them success.

Speakers and Sources

• Lee Hyun-woo — Licensed Administrative Agent and Certified Appraiser; lecturer in Administrative Procedure Theory at 합격의법학원 (Hapgyeok Law Academy).
• Legal and exam materials discussed — The Administrative Procedure Act, Framework Act on Administrative Investigations, Family Relations Registration Act, Information Disclosure Act, related statutes, precedents, prior examination questions, and the instructor’s mock exams. No other speaker is identifiable in the subtitles.