2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

The defendant is the assistant professor of the Department D of C University.

On August 31, 2009, the Plaintiff was appointed as a part-time lecturer of the E-department of C University and served until August 24, 2015 as follows.

The defendant sent a list of the E-hour Instructors in charge of the class period of his/her class to the plaintiff on August 31, 2009 to January 30, 201, and the social environment (3) E-School Part-Time Instructors from March 2, 2010 to July 30, 2010 to July 30, 2010; the Social Welfare Law (3) E-School Part-Time Instructors from August 30 to January 31, 2011 to the plaintiff on March 25, 2011; the defendant sent a list of the E-School Part-Time Instructors in charge to the plaintiff on March 31, 201 to May 31, 201; the program development and evaluation (3) the E-School Part-Time Instructors in charge to the plaintiff on September 5, 2011 to December 31, 2012 to the E-School Part-Time Instructors in charge of the E-School Part-Time 3 of the E-School.

Meanwhile, according to Article 17 of the Higher Education Act, teachers to be assigned to schools shall be classified into professors, associate professors, assistant professors, and full-time instructors in addition to presidents and deans referred to in paragraph (1), as prescribed by Presidential Decree.

In addition to faculty members, teachers holding concurrent posts, honorary professors, part-time lecturers, etc. may be assigned to take charge of education or research.

C. Article 3 of the Regulations on the Personnel Management of Teachers holding Concurrent Posts stipulates all matters concerning the requirements and procedures for the appointment of teachers holding concurrent posts based on the above Higher Education Act. According to Article 3 of the above Regulations, the faculty holding concurrent posts is required to be appointed by the president after recommendation by the president of the relevant faculty or deliberation by the

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 8, 9, and 23-1, 24-3, 27, and 28-3, 27, and 28-28 of the evidence, and the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole argument as to the purport of the whole argument, shall be the plaintiff to the teacher holding concurrent office in the Department of D University around December 12, 2015.