The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff, including the part arising from the supplementary participation.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the assertion that the determination on the claim for nullification of the promotion committee composition approval disposition is unlawful, the lower court acknowledged the facts as indicated in its reasoning based on the adopted evidence, and found the following facts: (i) the Defendant rendered the approval of the promotion committee composition of the instant case on December 29, 2006; (ii) the Defendant rendered the prior approval of the establishment of the promotion committee on July 20, 2012; and (iii) the Plaintiff was confirmed to be invalid by the instant adjudication on January 14, 2013, which was before the instant lawsuit was filed; and (iv) the Intervenor’s Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) filed an administrative lawsuit seeking revocation of the instant adjudication, but the judgment dismissing the Intervenor’s claim on October 24, 2013, which became final and conclusive; and (iv) the Defendant, even if the instant lawsuit seeking nullification of the approval of the promotion committee establishment was pending on February 11, 2014, determined that the prior approval of the establishment of the promotion committee was unlawful.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on the legal interest in seeking nullification of the approval disposition by the committee.

2. As to the assertion that the judgment on the amendment of the purport of the claim is unlawful, the lower court acknowledged the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning based on the adopted evidence, and subsequently, amended the purport of the claim of this case that the Plaintiff came into existence.