1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasons why the court of the first instance should explain are as follows, except for the addition of the judgment on the argument that the plaintiff emphasized in particular in this court, and thus, all of the reasons for the first instance judgment are as follows. Thus, this Court shall accept it in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. According to Article 14 of the former Government Commendation Regulations (amended by Presidential Decree No. 24314, Jan. 16, 2013), the subjects of the presidential and the Prime Minister commendation are recommended by the heads of central administrative agencies, etc. through the Public Deliberation Council under Article 13 of the same Regulations.

However, since the central administrative agency having jurisdiction over the National University is the Ministry of Education, the representative of the defendant Republic of Korea must be the Minister of Education in the lawsuit in this case, and it is unlawful to allow the Minister of Justice to represent the defendant in the first instance judgment

B. Article 2 of the Act on Litigation to Which the State is a Party (hereinafter “Act”) provides that “The Minister of Justice shall represent the State in a lawsuit to which the State is a party or intervenor (hereinafter “State lawsuit”).” Article 3(2) of the Act provides that “The Minister of Justice may, if deemed necessary for the State lawsuit concerning the duties or supervision of an administrative agency’s affairs, designate an employee of the administrative agency after hearing the opinion of the head of the administrative agency concerned and allow him/her to perform the lawsuit.”

Thus, as long as the plaintiff filed the lawsuit in this case by disclosing the defendant as the Republic of Korea, it is lawful to appoint the legal representative as the Minister of Justice. According to the records, the Minister of Justice may know that the employees C, D, and E of B University affiliated with the Ministry of Education was designated as the litigation performer in this case. Thus, there is no violation of law as to this.

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is just.