1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The grounds alleged by the defendant in the trial of the first instance while filing an appeal are not significantly different from those alleged by the defendant in the first instance, and the first instance court’s rejection of the defendant’s assertion is justifiable even if all of the evidence submitted in the first instance court and the fact inquiry results on the Incheon Metropolitan City Southern District Office of Education, Daejeon Metropolitan City Dong Office of Education, Busan District Office of Education, Ulsan Metropolitan City Office of Education, Ulsan Metropolitan City North Office of Education, Ulsan District Office of Education, and Gwangju Metropolitan City Seo-gu Office

Therefore, the court's explanation on this case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for dismissal or addition of some contents as follows. Thus, the court's explanation on this case is acceptable in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The Enforcement Decree of the second sentence of the first instance court is "Enforcement Decree (amended by Presidential Decree No. 25375, Jun. 11, 2014; hereinafter the same shall apply)".

The second place of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter referred to as the "Guidelines for Adjustment") shall be referred to as the "Guidelines for Adjustment".

The first, second, the second, the second, "each of the dispositions of this case" shall be deemed to be "the disposition of this case".

The "registration of change (report)" in the 10th sentence of the first instance court shall be read as "registration of change (report)".

Under the 12th sentence of the first instance court, the "156 won (15.0% increase)" of the fifth sentence is "156 won (15.0% increase)".

제1심 판결문 제14쪽 아래에서 둘째 줄의 “수강료가 돠하다는”을 “수강료가 과하다는”으로 고친다.

Following the second below the 17th decision of the court of first instance, the amount of the place equivalent to 70% from the lowest tuition fees to the highest tuition fees as a result of the examination of the above standard of education of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office of Education which is higher than the standard set by the defendant is excessive.