1. It is confirmed that the Defendant’s dismissal disposition against the Plaintiff on August 31, 2012 is invalid.

2. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a)on 192.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 1, 1999, the Plaintiff was promoted as an associate professor on April 1, 2001, as well as an associate professor on April 1, 2008, after being appointed as a computer graphic and a full-time lecturer at C University established and operated by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant University”). Around 2010, the Plaintiff served until August 31, 2012 when the department to which the Plaintiff belongs was changed to the industrial design on the ground of the abolition of the computer graphic department.

B. Around the beginning of July 2011, the instant university enacted a draft of the Regulations on the Restructuring of the University of this case (hereinafter “Rescue Regulations”) and the Regulations on the Regulations on dedicated to the Audit and Inspection of Medical Officials (hereinafter “Rules on the dedicated to the Audit and Inspection of Medical Officials”).

On July 12, 2011, the Plaintiff submitted to the president of the University of this case (hereinafter referred to as the “President”) a written consent to the effect that he/she fully was fully aware of the restructuring regulations and lectures, and that he/she consented to the enforcement thereof.

C. On September 1, 2011, the president enacted and promulgated regulations in exclusive charge of restructuring and lectures, and on February 14, 2012, the president selected the industrial design division as the subject of restructuring in the year 2012.

On August 3, 2012, the University Restructuring Committee decided the lowest plaintiff as a teacher subject to restructuring (hereinafter “instant decision”), since the evaluation results among four teachers of industrial design and four teachers is below 70.

On August 6, 2012, the president notified the Plaintiff that he/she was determined as a teacher subject to restructuring, and requested the Plaintiff to present his/her opinion on the desired course of movement until August 8, 2012.

E. The Plaintiff on August 7, 2012 and

8. 14. On August 31, 2012, the Defendant expressed his wish to retire to the Defendant, and the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff from office on August 31, 2012.

(f) Relevant regulations, including school regulations, articles of incorporation, and restructuring regulations, and relevant statutes of the university of this case are as shown in the attached Form.

[Reasons for Recognition] Nos. 1, 2, Eul Nos. 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20.