1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, such as accepting the judgment, are as follows: (a) the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: (b) it shall be revised that “the qualification of a lawyer shall be granted if a law school course is faithfully completed and passed through an absolute evaluation conducted within and outside the limit of 95% of passing rate, such as a qualifying examination for doctors, dental doctors, and oriental medical doctors who can apply for only a specialized graduate school aiming at “training experts through school-oriented education”, and (c) it shall be cited as it is stated in the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for supplementing or adding the judgment in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Supplementary and additional Plaintiff asserts as follows.

Article 10 (1) of the Attorney Examination Act provides that "a pass of an examination shall be decided by considering the purpose of introduction of a law school sufficiently."

The purpose of this study is to introduce the law school law school system, as clearly stated in the report materials of three times distributed by the defendant on the date of the first, second, and third anniversary of the date of the pass of the bar examination, it means to obtain the lawyer qualification if the defendant faithfully completed the law school curriculum and passed the qualifying examination implemented as an absolute evaluation as if it were conducted at specialized graduate schools such as parliamentary, dental, and oriental medicine.

The defendant violated Article 10 (1) of the Attorney Examination Act, since the defendant did not consider the purpose of introducing the law school.

In addition, the instant disposition is against the principle of proportionality, contrary to the suitability of the means, the principle of minimum infringement and the principle of reasonableness, as well as the legitimacy of its purpose, and is against the principle of proportionality, and without reasonable grounds discriminates against other qualifying examinations or comparative groups, as well as against the first disposition.