2. Of the costs of lawsuit, the part pertaining to the participation of the Plaintiff’s Intervenor is as follows.

The plaintiffs and the supplementary intervenors (hereinafter referred to as "participatings") entered the E University operated by the Educational Foundation E (hereinafter referred to as "the University of this case") (hereinafter referred to as "the University of this case") on September 1, 2004 and graduated on February 28, 2006 from the Plaintiff C, who entered the college on March 1, 2006 and graduated on August 31, 2007. The plaintiff B entered the college on March 31, 2007 and graduated on August 31, 2008, and the plaintiff A entered the college on March 1, 2009 and graduated on February 28, 2010.

The Minister of Education, Science and Technology (hereinafter “Defendant”) issued a corrective order pursuant to Article 29(1) of the Government Organization Act (amended by Act No. 12114, Dec. 24, 2013); and Article 3 of the Addenda of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, based on the result of the audit of “the actual status of the implementation of policies on creative education” on the instant school juristic person implemented by the Board of Audit and Inspection from October 8, 2012 to November 23, 2012; and the result of an on-site investigation conducted from May 9, 2013 to May 10, 2013 by the Defendant pursuant to Article 60(1) of the Higher Education Act (wholly amended by Act No. 12036, Aug. 13, 2013; hereinafter the same shall apply).

Among the corrective orders, on the ground that the master’s degree in the major of the university of this case’s “special activities and gifted education” and “permanent social education” (hereinafter referred to as the “permanent social education”) was unfairly awarded, the above major graduates including the Plaintiffs already granted credits and master’s degree and the F’s degree are revoked and the F’s license’s license was revoked (hereinafter referred to as the “instant corrective order”).

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 12 and 14, and judgment as to the main defense of the whole pleadings.