1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 1, 2014, the Plaintiff is appointed as the president of a quasi-governmental institution (hereinafter “C institution”) under the Act on the Management of Public Institutions (hereinafter “Public Institutions Act”), and the Defendant is the head of the competent agency of C institutions.

B. On February 26, 2016, the C Institutional Council decided to recommend the dismissal of the Plaintiff to the Defendant on the ground that “the Plaintiff received entertainment from the president of D Co., Ltd., and health is not good due to cancer surgery, etc.”

(hereinafter the above resolution of the board of directors is referred to as the "resolution of the board of directors of this case").

On March 3, 2016, the Defendant decided to dismiss the Plaintiff in accordance with the foregoing recommendation for dismissal, and notified the Plaintiff of “the appointment of the Director of the C administrative Agency and appointment of acting person,” and the said written notification does not contain any grounds for dismissal of the Plaintiff.

(2) The court below held that the defendant's dismissal decision against the plaintiff was "the dismissal of this case" and the defendant's above notification was "the dismissal notification of this case"). (3) The defendant's dismissal decision of the plaintiff is "the dismissal notification of this case" and there is no dispute as to the plaintiff's dismissal ground, each entry in Gap

2. Determination as to the defendant's defense prior to the merits

A. Defendant’s defense 1) The non-existence of standing, etc. as a party provides that a contract shall be concluded with a quasi-government agency if the non-existence of standing, etc. is appointed as the head of a quasi-government agency, and even if the Defendant dismisses the head of a quasi-government agency, the dismissal of this case is the same as the termination of delegation contract, and thus, the dismissal of this case does not constitute an administrative disposition. Therefore, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the State seeking confirmation of invalidation of termination of a contract, notwithstanding that the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking confirmation of invalidity of dismissal disposition, which is an appeal litigation, is unlawful. As such, the instant lawsuit was unlawful. 2) The Plaintiff was appointed as the head of the C agency on April 1, 201