The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

In light of the circumstances indicated in its holding, the lower court determined that the Defendant’s notification that the Plaintiff did not deliver a Class 2 vocational training instructor’s certificate to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff did not have a three-year vocational training experience as prescribed by law, excluding the career considered at the time of acquiring a Class 3 vocational training instructor’s industrial facility qualification without any legal basis, was unlawful since it abused

In light of the records, the above determination by the court below is justifiable in accordance with the relevant legal principles. There is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to deviation and abuse of discretion in the issuance of qualification certificate for workplace skill development training.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yang Chang-soo

Justices Kim Chang-suk

Justices Jo Hee-de