1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant, including those resulting from the supplementary participation.

1. Details of the decision;

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s status as the party to the case is D University in Masung City C (hereinafter “instant school”).

2) On March 1, 2005, the Intervenor’s Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) was a foreign full-time teacher of the instant department E (hereinafter “department E”) with the term of the contract fixed for one year, and continued to be reappointed on a one-year basis for the expiration of the term of the contract, and entered into an employment contract with the term of March 1, 2016 up to February 28, 2017.

B. On October 31, 2016, the Plaintiff provided guidance on the expiration of the term of appointment and the application for reappointment to the Intervenor, and the Intervenor submitted an application for reappointment to the Plaintiff on November 1, 2016. (2) On December 6, 2016, the Plaintiff held a teachers personnel committee to decide to refuse the Intervenor’s reappointment, which is classified as subordinate to the results of the evaluation of reappointment, by reflecting the Plaintiff’s opinion on the reduction of the number of academic subjects resulting from the structural reform of the university and the securing of the number of academic subjects resulting from the structural reform of the university and the number of academic subjects resulting from the reorganization of the curriculum, based on the number of academic subjects resulting from the structural reform of the university and the number of academic subjects resulting from the reorganization of the curriculum, and notified the Intervenor on the same day

3) On December 22, 2016, an intervenor submitted a written objection to the instant school on December 22, 2016. On December 27, 2016, the Plaintiff: (a) held a teachers’ personnel committee to provide an intervenor with an opportunity to state his/her opinion; and (b) held a teachers’ personnel committee again on December 29, 2016, and decided to refuse to re-appoint the Intervenor. (c) On December 29, 2016, the Plaintiff: (d) reduced the number of academic subjects following the university structure reform by the intervenors on December

2. Not securing the completion of teaching subjects due to the reorganization of the curriculum of a department;

3. Notification that the exclusion from reappointment has become final and conclusive on the grounds of the sub-examination result of reappointment.

hereinafter referred to as "the rejection disposition of re-election of this case"

(c)in this regard;