2. The plaintiff.

A. The Defendant is an educational foundation that establishes and operates C University (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant University”). From March 1, 2012 to February 28, 2014, the Plaintiff was appointed as an assistant professor for non-retirement age at the Defendant University and served as an associate professor in the Flus Health Management and an associate professor affiliated with the Defendant University. After review of reappointment, the Plaintiff was reappointed as an assistant professor for non-retirement age (education, guidance, and industry-academic cooperation) from March 1, 2014 to February 29, 2016 and served as an assistant professor for health movement management and an associate professor affiliated with the Defendant.

B. (1) The plaintiff is a teacher subject to examination for reappointment on February 29, 2016, who has expired the term of appointment, and is subject to examination for reappointment according to the defendant's personnel management regulations for teachers and employment regulations for non-retirement full-time teachers by the end of November, 201, and evaluation for reappointment according to the prescribed evaluation standards. As a result of the evaluation, at least 75 out of 100 points shall be reappointed.

(2) On December 2, 2015, the Defendant: (a) as a result of the re-employment review conducted by the Plaintiff on December 2, 2015, the average score of the achievements evaluation at least 75 out of the term of appointment did not meet at least 74.3; and (b) on December 17, 2015, the Defendant notified the teachers’ personnel committee of the written statement that the Plaintiff would be present until December 10, 2015 and

(3) Although the Plaintiff submitted a written vindication, the Defendant notified the Defendant of his refusal of re-election on December 30, 2015, as the average points for the evaluation of his achievements fall short of 74.3 points average to 75 points average.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition rejecting reappointment”) C.

(1) In principle, the defendant university shall conduct the first individual self-evaluation, the second faculty member evaluation team evaluation (improvement) evaluation, and the third president evaluation in relation to the procedures for the examination of reappointment of the defendant university. However, the third president evaluation shall be conducted in three stages, but the non-retirement class evaluation may be separately determined and implemented by the president, and Article 10(7) of the Regulations on the Personnel Management of Faculty Members and the non-retirement class faculty.