1. Compulsory execution based on the Seoul High Court Decision 2008Na34530 Decided November 4, 201 by the Defendant against the Plaintiff is 2,632.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 1, 1986, the Defendant was newly appointed as a full-time lecturer at C junior college (aC junior college was integrated with CU and the name of the school was changed to AU), which was operated by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and was reappointed twice on March 1, 1988, and on March 1, 1990, as the president of the university until February 28, 191. The Defendant served as a full-time lecturer at CU’s industrial management department from March 1, 1991 to October 1, 1991, and was promoted as an assistant professor on February 28, 1995.

B. From February 10, 1995 to March 20, 1995, the term of appointment of the defendant expired, the plaintiff held a personnel committee and the board of directors. The defendant disclosed a list of the names related to the defendant's entrance and dismissal of the plaintiff, and decided not to re-appoint the defendant on the ground that the plaintiff's student as well as the plaintiff's students, graduates, and parents' loss and decentralization, and damaged their dignity as professors. The plaintiff notified the defendant on March 30, 1995.

(hereinafter referred to as “decisions rejecting the first appointment”)

Since then, the "Special Act for the Relief of Persons Disqualified from the Appointment System for University Faculty Members" was enacted on July 13, 2005 by Act No. 7583, and enforced on October 14 of the same year, the defendant is referred to as the "Special Committee on the Examination of Appeal against Teachers under the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development" on October 14, 2005 based on the above Act.

(D) On February 38, 2006, the Special Committee filed a petition for review of reappointment, and the Special Committee revoked the decision to refuse reappointment on February 28, 2006. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Special Committee against revocation of the decision to refuse reappointment as the Seoul Administrative Court 2006Guhap20730, but the above court rendered a judgment to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim on November 3, 2006 on the ground that the decision to refuse reappointment was illegal. The above judgment was dismissed after the Plaintiff’s appeal (Seoul High Court 2006Nu29760).