1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The Defendant’s three years against the Plaintiff on September 6, 2018.

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the disposition, such as the background of the disposition, are as stated in Paragraph (1) (including Sections 10 through 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance) among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the fact that each “Defendant Minister of Education” in the second, 15, 7, 18, 20, and 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance is “the co-defendant of the court of first instance”, and therefore, it is acceptable as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the grounds for disposition are as follows: “In addition, it is nothing more than 14 out of the judgment of the court of first instance that “it is nothing more than 52,825,080 won for the entire student personnel expenses, including the student personnel expenses paid for the task of excessive donation; the total student personnel expenses paid in relation to the task of excessive donation was 352,825,080 won; the Korean Research Foundation’s contributions 211,006,052 won; and 407,819,000 won for the government non-governmental contributions (hereinafter “regular personnel expenses”) were paid to the students by cash withdrawal or transfer on the 25th of each month; the remaining 130,439,080 won (hereinafter “other personnel expenses”) were paid to the whole student personnel expenses paid for the task of excessive donation; and the remaining 130,439,080 won was either paid to the student during the night session, 2075, and 757.

Since it is the same as the statement in the claim, it is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(b) The grounds for the court’s explanation on this part of the argument regarding the aggregate of the periods of restrictions on participation are as follows: “1” among the judgment of the first instance, “10th and 7nd and 5th and 9th and 12nd and 9th and 12nd, “the Defendant and the first instance court”.