1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who entered into a standard agreement with the Defendant Small and Medium Business Corporation (hereinafter “Defendant Corporation”) and was dismissed from the training institute (hereinafter “DD Training Institute”) under the Defendant Corporation. Defendant B was the head of D Training Institute from August 2013 to December 2013, and Defendant C was an expert co-ordinate in charge of the Plaintiff at D Training Institute.

B. On April 1, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a standard agreement with the Youth Startup Academy and entered the DD Training Institute (hereinafter “instant task”) and determined as the total project cost of KRW 7 million (government subsidies of KRW 4.9 million, KRW 2.1 million, and KRW 2.1 million) with the Defendant Corporation from April 1, 2013 to February 17, 2014 during the period of the agreement, and the development project task of “the multiple language key system” for foreign languages and IT e-learning (hereinafter “instant task”).

2) The Convention on the Standards for Youth Start-up Academy to implement the Convention (hereinafter “instant Convention”).

(1) Upon entering into the instant agreement and the standards for management of project costs of the Youth Startup Academy (hereinafter referred to as “management standards for project costs of this case”).

) Guidelines for the Operation of Youth Start-up Academy Business (hereinafter “Guidelines”)

(2) The Plaintiff entered the D Training Institute and received project funds from the Defendant Corporation in accordance with the instant agreement, and subsequently performed the instant task.

C. On November 1, 2013, the 1D Training Institute held the second interim evaluation of 26 persons who entered the Korea Youth Business Academy, and held the 26 persons who entered the 26th interim evaluation of the Plaintiff’s task at the Business Operation Committee as “the lowest grade of the Plaintiff’s discharge of the Plaintiff’s task.” On November 27, 2013, the Plaintiff was determined as the person to be dismissed from the Plaintiff on December 2, 2013 as the result of the interim evaluation, and pursuant to Article 26 of the Operating Guidelines and Article 8 of the instant Convention.