1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 26, 2014, the Defendant issued a public notice of inviting professors to employ one professor in B University sports education and D, and the Plaintiff and eight persons, including C, provided support.

B. According to the relevant provisions, such as the Decree on the Appointment of Educational Officials and the Regulations on the Screening for New Employment of University Professors (hereinafter “instant screening provision”), the screening procedure shall determine the final order by summing up the points appraised through a basic examination, a major examination, a major examination, a major examination, a lecture examination, and a lecture ability evaluation, and shall undergo an interview among the candidates recommended by recommending more than one candidate in each division (the contents of the screening procedure are as follows; hereinafter “instant screening procedure”). After the instant screening procedure, the Defendant shall make a decision on the person selected as a candidate for appointment by the instant screening procedure with the consent of the University Personnel Committee (hereinafter “instant screening procedure”).

Three persons (at least 1/3, professors of other universities, and professors recommended by the relevant department)/three major researchers (at least 1/3, professors of other universities, and the rest, professors of the principal course recommended by the relevant department) who have passed the 1/3 major major examination of the 504 major examination (including the 1/30 major examination of the recruitment-related department), who are five professors of five departments (including the 35(30), all 156 interview examinations, the 156 major director, the 2 major director of the faculty, and the 2 professor recommended by the relevant department).

C. Of the above eight applicants, five thousand applicants, including the Plaintiff and C, passed the basic examination, the examination of major feasibility, and the examination of major majors. The five applicants, excluding C, shall be deemed unfair since the professor E, a major examiner, has received an academic degree from the same guidance professor as C, who is the applicant, and thus, the examination procedure of this case is unfair.