불합격처분 취소의 소
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following addition or dismissal. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Part III of the judgment of the court of first instance, which was added or used after being added, “The Defendant grading members” shall be written by having “All 21 Defendant grading members”.
The following shall be added to the third 8th of the judgment of the first instance.
2-1) The result of the practical-production model submitted by the Plaintiff seems to have been colored more than the result produced by other examinees even on the land, and less than the result produced by other examinees. The third party 13 to 17 in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be put in as follows. (4) B manufactured the test test weight with the color of the Flue system (as a result of the Defendant’s argument, its color is A1BP-U). Although the same color was manufactured and sold for any purpose other than testing, there was no similar color test test weight, it was manufactured and sold, and the similar color test weight is manufactured and sold, and other manufacturers are also manufactured and sold.
Part 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance, the 14th to 16th shall be followed as follows:
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 5 evidence, Eul 7 and 9 evidence (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the verification by the court of first instance, the result of the appraisal by the appraiser C belonging to the Korea Testing and Research Institute, the result of the fact inquiry by the court of first instance on Eul of the court of first instance, the results of the fact inquiry by the court of first instance, the results of the fact inquiry by the Korea Testing and Research Institute of Chemical Convergence in this Court, and the whole purport of the arguments are as follows.
In light of the following circumstances, the above facts of recognition, the evidence set forth above, and the evidence set forth in the evidence set forth in the evidence set forth in subparagraphs B, B, and 8 may be recognized by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings, the Weights used in the model outcome produced and submitted by the