1. The action against the plaintiff's primary claim added in the trial shall be dismissed;

2. The plaintiff's conjunctive claim

1. The reasoning for this part of the basic facts is that the court stated the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance from No. 2 to No. 3. 3. Thus, this part of the basic facts is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff does not constitute grounds for dismissal, and even if it falls under grounds for dismissal, it is not due to the plaintiff's lack of experience and mistake, and it is not due to the plaintiff's act of improper conduct for the plaintiff's individual interest. In light of the fact that the dismissal of this case has been done faithfully after the plaintiff's appointment, it is illegal since the dismissal of this case has abused the right of disciplinary action. Thus, the defendant primarily sought confirmation of invalidity of the dismissal of this case and sought revocation of the dismissal of this case. 2) Accordingly, the defendant's act of appointment of B head has the nature of contract under public law by agreement between the parties. Thus, the dismissal of this case does not constitute a disposition subject to appeal litigation, and therefore, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. We examine the main claim and the ancillary claim together.

1) Even if an administrative agency terminates a labor relationship between itself and the other party by unilateral declaration of intention, it cannot be readily concluded that the declaration of intention is an administrative disposition by exercising public authority as an administrative agency. Whether the declaration of intention constitutes an administrative disposition subject to appeal litigation depending on how relevant statutes specifically provide for the other party’s labor relationship, or whether the declaration of intention is either a party to a contract under public law or a party to a contract, on an equal basis (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 25, Oct. 25, 2012).