교원소청심사위원회결정취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part arising from the supplementary participation.
1. The court's explanation of this case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following cases, and thus, this is acceptable in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
[Supplementary part] The 12th to 14th to 17th of the 12th judgment of the court of first instance are as follows.
[2] In full view of the following circumstances, the Plaintiff granted credits to students without actually proceeding the instant curriculum (hereinafter “the instant curriculum”) in light of the measurements of “the instant curriculum” and the dental ward’s disease (hereinafter “the instant curriculum”) in light of the following circumstances, the instant curriculum is conducted 100% theoretical classes, and is conducted by up to 13:30-14:45 each week, and by 13:30-30-14:45 each week, and by 13:30-14:45 each week, the date of the instant curriculum. The Plaintiff cannot be said to have completely proceeded with the instant curriculum, such as lectures, etc.).
No examination has been conducted.
Students M also stated that he did not actually proceed with the instant lessons.
The plaintiff carried out the course of study at a specified time, the student F and M were present at each week, and the attendance book was prepared with the content that grants interim/end examination points, but the above attendance book was prepared with the content that is different from the actual purpose of giving credits to F and M.
C) As to this, the Plaintiff asserted to the effect that the Plaintiff could not be deemed to have failed to continue the instant lessons, since the Plaintiff continued the instant lessons by means of rap seminars and personal research interview. However, in light of the following circumstances, it is difficult to recognize the Plaintiff’s above assertion. (F, a student of the instant veterinary industry, is the Plaintiff.