1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Details of the instant disposition

A. The Plaintiff is a professor of the business department in the National University B (hereinafter “instant University”).

B. The instant university, following the procedures for the selection of candidates for the president appointment, recommended the Plaintiff on May 19, 201, and C professors on the second order. On July 4, 2014, the Defendant requested the president of the pertinent university to re-elect a candidate for the president appointment on the ground that both the Plaintiff and C professors are inappropriate as the president of the National University.

(hereinafter referred to as “pre-service disposition”). (c)

On July 21, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the revocation of the preceding disposition (Seoul Administrative Court 2014Guhap63473), and the Seoul Administrative Court issued a judgment revoking the preceding disposition on September 30, 2014 on the ground that the reasons and grounds for the preceding disposition were procedural errors without giving prior notice and giving an opportunity to hear opinions.

The defendant appealed against this and the Seoul High Court (Seoul High Court 2014Nu67392) rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on January 21, 2015 (Seoul High Court 2014Nu67392), and the defendant appealed against this, but the Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on June 19, 2018.

(Supreme Court Decision 2015Du38580). D.

On October 11, 2018, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that he did not recommend the appointment of the Plaintiff as the president of the university of this case for the following reasons:

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition”). He was a single or plural nationality for all his children, and in particular, he renounced his nationality in 2004 at the time when the duty of military service arises and did not neglect his military service.

In addition, your and his spouse thickness may be in violation of the Farmland Act because it purchased and owns a considerable area of farmland, but it does not actually engage in agricultural management.

In addition, it is subject to a disposition of fine due to drinking driving in 2001.

On the other hand, B University on December 2017.