Seongbuk-gu Seoul O4 Dong ○○ apartment 128 Dong 8* heading

Law Firm Rara, Attorney Park Hon-soo

Attorney Kim Dong-jin

Seoul Mapo-gu ○○ Dong 1 - 1

Representative President Park Ma-young

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 3 others

Attorney Lee Jin-hun, Lee Jin-hoon

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the creditor;

(a) the payment of benefits, (b) the assignment of lectures, (c) the assignment of laboratories, (d) the issuance of teaching identification cards;

(e)issuance and issuance of library access certificates, and (f) allow internal communications networks access. The debtor is the above company;

If a claim is not performed, the order of the court below shall be served from the day after the order of the court below was served until the performance of the obligation

It shall pay 1,000,000 won per day.

According to the records of this case, the following facts are substantiated.

A. Status of the parties

The debtor is a private school established by ○○ Association, which was established around February 1960 by the Foundation. The creditor is a new professor belonging to the Foundation, who was appointed as the head of ○○ University, from January 1, 1996 to February 1, 1998 as an assistant professor of the law of religion and religion of the debtor on September 1, 1995. However, from March 1, 1999 to May 1, 1999, the debtor's new graduate school was changed to be affiliated with the debtor's new graduate school. Since May 1, 1999 to September 1, 199, the debtor was promoted to an associate professor of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law.

B. The debtor's illegal dismissal and the progress of the lawsuit (1) have been employed as the principal of the debtor's school, and the creditor has frequently contacted with the NAO operating TV for the debtor's BK21 business partner, and has been in an inappropriate position as a new part of the towing conference member.

(2) On February 13, 2004, when the creditor failed to perform this properly, the creditor ordered the creditor to submit a resignation to the debtor under the name of the net name (OOBedi) which was achieved by the creditor on February 13, 2004, while the debtor's president, president of the company, etc. also demanded the creditor to cooperate with the creditor in submitting a resignation.

(3) Ultimately, on February 22, 2004, a creditor submitted a resignation letter against his will by soliciting the debtor president ○○ New, president ○○ New, president ○○○, president Kim○-○ New, etc., and submitted a resignation letter against his will. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 18358, Feb. 2, 2004>

29. A disposition to dismiss from office was taken by the debtor.

(4) When a creditor filed a petition review on the debtor's dismissal from office with the Teachers Disciplinary Review Committee of the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development (2004Guhap24936) and dismissed, the Seoul Administrative Court filed a lawsuit with the Seoul Administrative Court to revoke the decision of dismissal of the Teachers Disciplinary Review Committee (2004Guhap24936). The above court held that the creditor's dismissal from office against the creditor's will was unlawful, and that even if the creditor is appointed as the debtor under the order of dispatch of the regular association and the head of the branch office of the Korea Association, once he is appointed as the debtor of the private school, as long as he is appointed as the debtor of the private school, the creditor would be subject to the Private School Act as other teachers. The creditor was recognized as having served an inappropriate disposition for the guarantee of the teacher's status, but without any reason provided for in Article 56 of the Private School Act, which provides that the debtor's dismissal from office against the creditor's will, and that the creditor's dismissal from office was decided as unlawful.

C. On the other hand, creditors were appointed as associate professors on September 1, 199, and their terms of appointment expired as of August 31, 2006. (2) The debtor, after the above Supreme Court ruling, failed to submit a claim for rejection of reappointment to the creditor 20-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-7-7-7-6-7-7-6-7-6-7-7-7-6-7-7-7-6-7-7-6-6-7-6-7-8-6-6-6-6-6-7-7-7-7-7-7-6-7-8-7-7-7-1-6-7-7-7-7-7-7-10-7-7-7-10-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-

19. Research business evaluation period established by the debtor in relation to the examination for reappointment to creditors is unfair compared to the period in which the creditor actually worked as an associate professor. Since there is no fact that the creditor asserted against this, the creditor did not respond to the request for submission of the examination data, and thus the creditor's refusal of reappointment was deprived of the opportunity for the creditor to undergo a legitimate examination for reappointment as stipulated in Article 53-2 of the Private School Act, and the above refusal of reappointment did not give the creditor an opportunity for explanation, such as opportunity for attendance and written statement of opinion as stipulated in Article 53-2 (7) of the Private School Act, the above refusal of reappointment was decided to revoke the disposition of refusal of reappointment made by the debtor against the creditor on June 21, 2007. In response, the debtor filed with the Seoul Administrative Court a lawsuit for revocation of the decision of the Appeal Committee for Faculty Members (2007Guhap38592, 207).

(3) A college educational institution’s faculty member may be appointed under the terms of a contract, such as a period of service, salary, working conditions, achievements, and performance agreement, as prescribed by the articles of incorporation.

(4) A person who is authorized to appoint and dismiss teachers appointed pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (3) shall notify (referring to the notice in writing; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article) the teachers of the fact that the term of appointment expires not later than four months before the expiration of the term of appointment and that they may apply for deliberation on the reappointment.

(5) Where a teacher notified under paragraph (4) intends to be reappointed, he/she shall apply for deliberation on reappointment to the person entitled to appoint and dismiss within 15 days from the date of receipt of such notification.

(6) Upon receipt of an application for deliberation on reappointment under paragraph (5), the person who is entitled to appoint and dismiss shall determine whether to re-appoint the relevant teacher after deliberation by the teachers' personnel committee under the provisions of Article 53-3 and notify such fact to the relevant teacher not later than two months before the expiration of the term of appointment. In this case, when the relevant teacher is decided not to be reappointed, he/she shall notify

(7) In deliberating on whether the teachers' personnel committee is reappointed under the provisions of paragraph (6), it shall be based on objective grounds determined by school regulations, such as evaluation of the following matters. In such cases, the teachers concerned shall be given an opportunity to attend the teachers' personnel committee and state their opinions or present their opinions in writing on the date designated for at least 15 days in the course of such deliberation:

1. Matters concerning the education of students;

2. Matters relating to academic research; and

3. In order to examine any appeal against matters concerning guidance for students (2) (1) Any disciplinary action against teachers of various levels of schools and other unfavorable measures against their will (including any disposition of refusal to be reappointed to teachers provided for in Article 11-3 (4) of the Public Educational Officials Act and Article 53-2 (6) of the Private School Act; hereinafter the same shall apply), the Education and Human Resources Development Committee (hereinafter referred to as the "Examination Committee") shall be established under the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development;

Article 10 (Examination and Decision of Appeal) (2) Any decision of the Appeal Committee shall bind the person having the disposition authority.

2. Determination

A. A. A teacher of a private school appointed for a specified period under Article 53-2 (2) of the Private School Act after being subject to unfavorable measures such as dismissal, dismissal, removal, etc. before the expiration of the term of appointment, even if such unfavorable measures are null and void, he/she shall lose his/her status as a teacher as a matter of course due to the expiration of the term of appointment, unless there is any ground provision that grants the duty of reappointment to a teacher whose term of appointment expires under the articles of incorporation of a school juristic person or the personnel regulations of university professors. Therefore, even if removal from position or dismissal disposition taken before the expiration of the term of appointment is null and void, his/her status as a teacher cannot be restored (see Supreme Court en banc Decision

B. From the date of appointment as an associate professor of the debtor as of September 1, 199, the above 1-B after the creditor was appointed as an associate professor of the debtor as of August 31, 2006, the period of appointment expired as of August 31, 2006, and the debtor's voluntary dismissal disposition against the creditor's will is confirmed to be illegal due to the decision of the Supreme Court after the decision of the Supreme Court, although the period of appointment as an associate professor of the creditor expired as of April 17, 2007, the debtor has been specially appointed as an associate professor of the debtor as of March 1, 2007 to guarantee the creditor's opportunity for examination of reappointment, and the special appointment period has expired as of August 31, 2007, and the debtor did not submit evaluation of his achievements for reappointment on June 21, 2007, and there is still no evidence that the period of appointment as an associate professor or an associate professor has expired as of June 21, 2007.

C. Furthermore, the debtor's decision on the rejection of reappointment made on June 21, 2007 by the Appeal Committee for Teachers on the ground that the period of study subject to examination of teachers and lack of opportunity to explain is set and the fact that Article 10 (2) of the Special Act on the Improvement of Teachers' Status provides that the decision of the Appeal Committee for Teachers shall bind the person in charge of disposition shall be as explained in the above 1-C and 4, but the "speed" under Article 10 (2) of the Special Act on the Improvement of Teachers' Status means that the person in charge of disposition should immediately be re-appointed when the decision of the Appeal Committee for Teachers is made by the person in charge of disposition in accordance with the purport of the Decision of the Appeal Committee for Teachers' Status, and that the person in charge of disposition must submit to the creditor an application for review of reappointment and the evaluation results for review of reappointment to the creditor in accordance with the purport of the Appeal Committee for Teachers' Status.

D. Therefore, the provisional disposition application of this case on the premise that the creditor is an associate professor of the debtor's new abuse institute as of the date of the decision of this case is without merit.

Therefore, the provisional disposition application of this case against the creditor is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Cho Jong-sung

Judges and Tax Judges