The Measures Governing the Fringe Benefits and Mutual Assistance for Civil and Teaching Personnel of the Central Government, as promulgated by the Executive Yuan, and the similar regulations made by other agencies are intended for the administrative purpose of stabilizing the lives of public functionaries. Government funds are also injected into these funds. Therefore, these funds are of the nature of public law. The judicial system, as it is now, is divided into civil litigations and administrative litigations. Since a retiring public functionary’s application for the mutual assistance fund according to the abovementioned law is the exercise of a public-law property right, the rejection by the relevant authority shall be an infringement of property rights as protected by the Constitution. Therefore, administrative appeal and litigations should be allowed for remedies. Nevertheless, the Administrative Court Precedent 53-Pan-No.229 stated that “an administrative disposition imposed upon a public functionary is strictly within the scope of public administration, and is not analogous to the cases in which the people’s right is infringed upon by the government agencies’ dispositions; therefore, administrative appeals are not allowed.” Since the Precedent does not distinguish the types of dispositions, and administrative appeals are rejected across the board, such precedent is inconsistent with the above principle and shall no longer be applied. The Judicial Yuan has rendered several interpretations on this point. Interpretations Nos.187, 201 and 266 shall be supplemented by this Interpretation.