The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

In light of the legislative intent of Article 83 of the Enforcement Decree of the Education Act and the contents of the provision, the removal from school, which is the final means of disciplinary action against the student out of the school, was subject to statutory discretion in that the student's final means of action against the student can be conducted only if the student falls under any of the reasons provided for in subparagraphs 1 through 4 of the same Article. However, even if the student has such reasons as provided for in the above subparagraphs, it can not be taken as educational consideration. From the above point of view, it is not recognized that the decision to issue disciplinary action against expulsion was based on the educational discretion of the school principal, and it is not found that there was an error of law as pointed out by the second point of view that the decision to issue disciplinary action against the student was based on the opinion that the student did not have any such reasons as that of the school principal's discretion. Furthermore, according to the original judgment, the court below prohibited the student from entering the school's own disciplinary action against the student in question on July 16, 1969.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Ma-dong (Presiding Judge) and Ma-dong B-Jed Han-gu