1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is to dismiss or delete the following among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justifiable even if the plaintiff added evidence Nos. 9 and 16 submitted to this court, and it is also to the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment that there is no error as alleged

Therefore, it shall be quoted by Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Each "this court" of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance shall be "court of the first instance".

Each 6th 2th 6th 1th 1th 2th 1st 1th 3th 11th 3th 3th 2th 3th 3th 3th 3th 3th 3th 3

7 pages 12 " August 9, 2018" shall be changed to " August 7, 2018".

7 Myeon 12 and 13 shall be deleted from the logical earing route.

The "School Teachers' Appeals Review Committee" in the 7th parallel 14th parallel shall be raised to "Defendant".

The plaintiff's assertion to the effect that he/she is institutionalized as a full-time teacher after August 9, 2013 that he/she still exists in the nine Myeon 1."

9. The defendant's "the defendant" in the 11st place shall be changed to "B University".

9. The number of pages 12 shall be as follows:

(7) The head of a national or public university may appoint C professors as full-time faculty members of a public educational official research institute through the adjustment of the public educational official's own quota.

As it provides, C professor appears to be a full-time teacher of the research institute only when he/she is appointed as a public educational official, and 8 even if the Plaintiff applied for the subsidization of research funds in the project for supporting research expenses in the University B, a “full-time faculty member,” the subject of the subsidization, the Plaintiff, who received treatment equivalent to the full-time faculty, may be deemed to have received research funds, on the sole basis of such circumstance.