1. The part of the plaintiff's primary claim added at the trial of the case is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's appeal is filed.

1. This Court’s reasoning concerning this part of the reasons for the ruling is the same as the corresponding part of the “1....... developments leading to the ruling” from 5 to 6th of the second judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this Court’s reasoning is cited by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. The Plaintiff alleged that the “claim related to procedural illegality” alleged in the first instance trial at the date of the second hearing of the trial of the first instance is withdrawn. A.

In the second half of 2015 Technical Demand Survey conducted by the National Research Center of the National Research Foundation of the Ministry of Science and ICT (hereinafter referred to as the "National Research Foundation of Korea") under the control of the Ministry of Science and ICT (hereinafter referred to as the "National Research Foundation of Korea"), the Plaintiff's proposal "D" was selected as one priority in the field of planning and research promotion.

Therefore, the Plaintiff has the right to request the Minister of Science and ICT to promote the Plaintiff’s proposal as a national policy research task, and the Minister of Science and ICT has the legal obligation to implement the Plaintiff’s proposal as a planning task pursuant to Article 17(5)3 of the Regulations on the Management, etc. of National Research and Development Projects under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Science and ICT (the main sentence of Article 5(1) and Article 7(4)5 of the Regulations on the Management, etc. of Research and Development Projects

Nevertheless, on July 27, 2018, the Defendant’s omission (the Central Review Committee B) that refused the Plaintiff’s claim that urged the implementation of the obligation of the national policy research tasks is unlawful.

(b) 1) Violation of the rules of evidence is proposed by F, I, K, and N in the four research tasks selected as subordinate to the plaintiff, among the two-three tables of the first instance judgment, which are set forth below the plaintiff;

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant subordinated research tasks”, among the subordinate research tasks referred to as “the national research tasks”, subsidized national research expenses for two research tasks, and did not subsidize national research expenses for the remaining two research tasks.

(cc).