208Guhap34382. Revocation of a decision to dismiss a claim for nullification of partial disposition of re-contract

○ ○

Appeals Review Committee for Teachers

○ ○ Private Teaching Institutes

February 24, 2009

March 10, 2009

1. The defendant's decision to dismiss 2008 between the plaintiff and the defendant's intervenor on 008 - 2008 - The decision to invalidate the part of the disposition of re-contract No. 000 and the defendant's intervenor's allegation is revoked.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit, the part resulting from the intervention in the lawsuit is borne by the Intervenor joining the Defendant, and the remainder is borne by the Defendant.

The order is as set forth in the text.

1. Details of the disposition;

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or can be acknowledged by integrating the descriptions of Gap evidence 1 through 4, Eul evidence 5 through 10, Eul evidence 2-1 through 3, Eul evidence 3-1 through 8, Eul evidence 5-1, 2, Eul evidence 6-1 through 9, Eul evidence 7-1, 2, Eul evidence 8-1 through 6, Eul evidence 9-1 through 20, Eul evidence 10-1 through 3, Eul evidence 11-3, and Eul evidence 11, and the whole purport of pleadings:

A. The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) is an incorporated educational foundation that establishes and operates ○ University (hereinafter referred to as the “Supplementary Intervenor”) under its control. The Plaintiff is a teacher who was newly appointed on ○○ University on 1998 and as a full-time lecturer on ○○○ University on 2000 and was promoted as an assistant professor on ○○○ University on 2000, and thereafter served as the ○○ University and as an assistant professor on ○○○ University on 2008, and then served as the ○○ University and as an assistant professor on ○○○ University on 2008. The term of appointment (from ○○ on 204 to ○ on 208) expires.

B. In order for a teacher to conclude a contract at the expiration of the term of appointment, the Intervenor’s university submitted to the Intervenor’s university documents on the records of at least 200 percent of research in the current position, records of at least seven days on-site training, records of research and life guidance for students at an industry related to his/her major in the current position (hereinafter “documents related to re-contract”) and undergo deliberation by the Faculty Personnel Committee (Article 19 of the Regulations on the Personnel Management of Teachers) as to whether documents to be submitted to the Intervenor’s university meet the requirements for the faculty personnel regulations, and also entered into a re-contract only in the case of each faculty member with the average points of at least 35 points of the base points of re-contract during the term of appointment (Article 35 of the Regulations on the Personnel Management of Teachers). However, even if the basic points of the faculty personnel management regulations providing for re-contract are amended on July 24, 2007, the average point of less than 10 years after the expiration of the contract period of at least 20 years thereafter.

C. On ○, 2007, the Intervenor’s university demanded the Plaintiff to submit documents related to re-contracts by deeming that the Plaintiff was subject to re-contracts during the overall 2008 year period. On ○○ on 2007, the Plaintiff held a teachers’ personnel committee and examined documents related to re-contracts submitted by the Plaintiff. On ○○ on 2007, the Plaintiff notified the results of the review to the Plaintiff on ○○ on 2007, and demanded the Plaintiff to submit additional documents. As such, the Plaintiff failed to perform on-site training and student life guidance.

D. The Intervenor University demanded submission of data on the evaluation of teaching staff in 2007 on ○ ○ on 2007’s overall administration, and announced the teaching evaluation implementation plan in 2007 on ○ ○ 2007 on 2007.

E. The Intervenor’s university accepted the materials of faculty evaluation by ○○ on 2008, and held a faculty evaluation committee on ○○ on 2008, and conducted the first faculty evaluation on 2007, and received an objection against the first faculty evaluation from a person subject to evaluation from ○○ on 2008 to ○○ on 2008, and conducted the second faculty evaluation on 2008. The Plaintiff received the results of the second faculty evaluation in 2007.74 points in 2007.

F. The Intervenor’s university held a teachers’ personnel committee on October 2008, 200. The Plaintiff excluded the Plaintiff from the subject of the re-contract on the ground that the performance evaluation scores fall short of the re-contract standard points, as the average teaching achievement evaluation scores of 75.02 and teaching achievement evaluation scores of 2007 before 2007.74: Provided, That the Plaintiff notified the Plaintiff of the extension of the contract period for one year pursuant to the proviso of Article 20(2) of the Regulations on the Personnel Management of Teaching Staff, etc. on the ground that the performance evaluation scores fall short of the re-contract standard points, and the Plaintiff notified the Plaintiff of the extension of the contract period from the current number of professors to 00 on September 1, 208 without undergoing the resolution of the board of directors.

G. Accordingly, on April 2008, the plaintiff asserted that the part of the disposition of this case which extended the contract period of one year without the plaintiff's consent for the reason that the procedural defect in the process of review of reappointment and the class evaluation of the teaching was illegally and unreasonably conducted to the defendant on the ground that the part of the disposition of this case extended the contract period of one year without the plaintiff's consent was null and void, and the defendant filed a petition for review to seek confirmation of the invalidity of the part of the disposition of this case. The disposition of this case on October 2008 was not disadvantageous disposition against the plaintiff, but rather a disadvantageous disposition against the plaintiff on the part of the intervenor on the extension of the contract period of one year, and it cannot be viewed as a refusal disposition other than the extension of the contract period of the intervenor's extension for one year on the ground that the plaintiff's extension of contract period for one year to the plaintiff cannot be viewed as a disadvantageous disposition on the ground that the plaintiff's appeal does not constitute "the plaintiff's appeal of this case".

2. Whether the decision of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The instant disposition by the Intervenor’s university constitutes an unfavorable disposition against the Plaintiff, a fixed-term teacher, by unfairly deprived of the period of service for each class of four years guaranteed as an assistant professor pursuant to the relevant provisions, such as the Guidelines for Appointment as an associate professor. In particular, it is clear that the instant disposition was conducted based on the evaluation of teaching status, etc., of which the period of service as an assistant professor for four years guaranteed as an assistant professor, and thus, constitutes an unfavorable disposition for only one year, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the instant disposition cannot be deemed disadvantageous disposition, and thus, the Defendant’s decision that the instant disposition is unlawful.

(b) the relevant regulations;

It is as shown in the relevant provisions of the attached Table.

C. Determination

(3) As seen earlier, the Intervenor’s provision on the personnel management of the University provides that if the 1st anniversary of the 4th anniversary of the 4th anniversary of the 4th anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 4th anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 4th anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 4th anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 4th anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st 1st of the 1st anniversary of the 1st.

Therefore, the defendant's decision dismissing the plaintiff's petition by deeming that the disposition of this case in the intervenor school is not disadvantageous to the intervenor school and thus cannot be subject to a review of the appeal is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is decided to accept it, and it is decided as per the disposition.

Judges in fixed form of judge

Judges E.S.

High-ranking Judge No. Do;

Relevant Provisions

[Special Act on the Improvement of Teachers' Status]

Article 7 (Establishment of Teachers' Appeals Review Committee)

(1) The Ministry of Education, Science and Technology shall have an appeals review committee for teachers (hereinafter referred to as the "Review Committee") established under the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology in order to review appeals against disciplinary action against teachers of various levels of schools and other unfavorable measures against their will (including measures of refusing re-election against teachers under Article 11-3 (4) of the Public Educational Officials Act and Article 53-2 (6) of the Private School Act; hereafter the same shall apply in this paragraph).

Article 9 (Request, etc. for Examination of Appeal)

(1) If a teacher is dissatisfied with a disciplinary action or other unfavorable disposition against his/her will, he/she may request the Examination Committee to examine his/her appeal within thirty days after he/she is informed of such disposition. In such cases, the request for examination may appoint an attorney-at-law as his/her agent

[Articles of Incorporation of Intervenor]

Article 39 (Appointment and Dismissal) (2) Other teachers than the head of a school shall be appointed or dismissed by the chief director upon a resolution of the board of directors on the recommendation of the head of the relevant school, after deliberation by the standing committee: Provided, That a person who is appointed as the head of a university who is in office as a teacher of the relevant school shall be appointed as a teacher immediately before the appointment of the principal on the day following the expiration of the term of office of the principal, while the chief of the relevant

(1) The terms and conditions of employment of teachers under Article 39 (2) of the Articles of Incorporation shall be determined within the scope falling under any of the following subparagraphs:

1. Service period;

(a) Professor: Guarantee of retirement age;

(b) Associate professor: Six years; and

(c) Assistant professors: Four years; and

(d) A full-time lecturer: One year or two years; and

5. Re-contract: The re-contract of teachers shall be governed by the regulations on the personnel management of teachers.

Article 39-6 (Appointment of Teachers in Office) The provisions of the former Public Educational Officials Act, the Decree on the Appointment of Educational Officials, or the provisions of the Private School Act shall apply to cases where a teacher in office is appointed on the expiration of his/her service period as of January 1, 2002, and the matters concerning the operation thereof shall be separately determined by the dean.

【Employment Regulations for Teachers in Office】

Article 1 (Purpose) The purpose of this Regulation is to prescribe matters necessary for the appointment of teachers in office as of January 1, 2002.

Article 2 (Scope of Application) This provision shall apply to a teacher who is in office as of January 1, 2002 after being appointed for a specified period under the former Public Educational Officials Act, the Decree on the Appointment of Educational Officials, or the Private School Act.

Article 3 (Period of Service) Where a teacher is reappointed due to expiration of his/her working period (the appointment period determined by the regulations on the appointment of public educational officials and the appointment of educational officials, or the appointment period determined by the regulations on the Private School Act; hereinafter the same shall apply), the provisions of Article 5-2 of the Decree on the Appointment of Educational Officials or the provisions of the articles of incorporation of school juristic persons may apply to the appointment of a teacher at his/her own expense,

1. Professors: Period until the retirement age under the provisions of the articles of a school juristic person (the division of retirement age guarantee examination division);

2. Associate professors: Six years;

3. Assistant professors: Two years; and

【Regulations on the Personnel Management of Teachers】

Article 18-2 (Period of Contract) The duration of a teachers' re-contract shall be as follows:

1. Full-time instructors: Two years;

2. Assistant professors: Four years;

3. Associate professors: Six years;

4. To guarantee the retirement age; and

Article 19 (Requirements for Appointment) Documents required for a re-contract shall be as follows:

(1) As of the date of re-contract, there shall be at least 200 laboratories published in the incumbent name (standing instructors, assistant professors, and associate professors), and at least 100% of them shall be comprised of thesis, degree, patent (excluding utility model and design registration), author (IBN registration), and certified practical skills published in the famous domestic and foreign academic journal (including the academic journal).

(2) An industrial enterprise related to a major recognized by the dean in the current name of the position shall complete the field training for at least seven days, and a training enterprise shall be recognized only for listed enterprises and at least 20 full-time employees: Provided, That where an industrial enterprise is less than 20 persons due to the characteristics of the department, it shall submit a statement of the reason and obtain prior approval from the relevant department (art. 24, 2007; February 29, 2008).

(3) A student shall have a track record of teaching, research, and life guidance for students, and the student guidance record shall have a track record of counseling and guidance for at least 20 days a year, which is entered in the school life counseling log of the school administration system: Provided, That a student assigned to a position of at least the chief of the office shall be at least ten days a year (the student guidance record during the assignment to a position to a position to be assigned to a position to a position for at least the head of the office).

(4) Where a teacher re-contracts with another teacher, evaluation shall be conducted in advance and deliberation by the teachers' personnel committee.

Article 20 (Evaluation of Recontract) (1) The evaluation of a teacher whose term of appointment expires shall be assessed on a yearly basis pursuant to the "Enforcement Rule of the Evaluation of Teaching Status" for his/her achievements during the period of appointment.

(2) An average of the annual rating point shall be at least 35 points: Provided, That where the average point is less than 35 points, a contract may be assessed by extending the contract period from the current position only once to one year: Provided, That where the period of assignment is at least 50 percent of the period of assignment, only Article 19 shall apply without a re-contract. (art. 18, 2005; July 24, 2007)

Article 24 (Evaluation Method) The Enforcement Rule of the Teaching Service Evaluation shall apply.

Article 25 (Evaluation Time and Period of Evaluation) The evaluation of teachers' achievements shall be conducted one month prior to the renewal of a contract.

Addenda (Enforcement on July 24, 2007)

(2) The provisions of Article 19 (1) shall enter into force on and after March 1, 2008.

(3) From 206 to 206, at least 11 points shall be able to renew the contract at least 35 points; from 2007 to 35 points shall be able to renew the contract; from 2006 to 35 points may be postponed; from 110 to 35 points as at before 206 and after 2007, or from 11 points to 35 points under this paragraph, the examination of the contract may be postponed for one year. The end of the contract may be postponed.