1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Status 1) The Defendant’s college (hereinafter “Defendant college”)

(2) On September 1, 1998, the Plaintiff was appointed as an associate professor on July 22, 2012 as a new professor for industrial information design and industrial information design at the Defendant’s university.

B. The Defendant’s first disposition rejecting the reappointment against the Plaintiff 1) the Plaintiff’s term of appointment expired on February 28, 2015. On August 12, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that “The Plaintiff was dismissed from reappointment pursuant to Article 10(1)1 of the Rules on the Personnel Management of the Teaching Staff of the Defendant University since the average teaching staff evaluation score of two years (2 years, 2013, 2014, and 2014) of the Plaintiff was less than 416 and less than 500 points, and the appointment of the Plaintiff for deliberation on reappointment ends on August 31, 2015” (hereinafter “the first disposition rejecting the reappointment”).

(2) The Plaintiff filed an appeal review with the Appeal Commission for Teachers. On October 28, 2015, the Appeal Commission for Teachers decided to revoke the first disposition to refuse reappointment on the ground that the first disposition to refuse reappointment was procedural defect in violation of Article 53-2(6) of the Private School Act, and the Defendant’s provision on the assessment of teaching staff was unlawful on the ground that the defect in the application of the criteria for review was illegal.

(hereinafter referred to as "decision of revocation of the first instance").

On January 29, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for deliberation on the rejection of the second appointment against the Plaintiff and related litigation. On June 28, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff was dismissed from the reappointment pursuant to Article 10(1)1 of the Regulations on the Personnel Management of Faculty Members of the Defendant University (hereinafter “the second rejection disposition”).

(2) On June 17, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a petition review with the Appeal Commission for Teachers, and the Appeal Commission for Teachers, on July 27, 2016, did not notify the Plaintiff of the criteria for review of reappointment.