The nature of a disposition of exclusion from reappointment and notification for a teacher appointed for a fixed term of contract and whether there is a benefit to seek nullification thereof.

Article 53-2 (2) of the former Private School Act (amended by Act No. 4226 of Apr. 7, 1990) shall not be deemed to violate Articles 11 and 22 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea. In addition, if there is no provision providing that a teacher appointed with the term of employment shall be reappointed to a teacher whose term of employment expires under the articles of association of a school juristic person or the personnel regulations of a university faculty member, he/she naturally loses his/her status as a teacher upon the expiration of the term of employment. Thus, since the president of a university under a school juristic person after that provision confirms and notifies that he/she will be retired ipso facto from his/her office at the expiration of the term of employment, he/she does not have any legal effect between the teacher and the school juristic person.

Article 53-2(2) of the former Private School Act (amended by Act No. 4226 of Apr. 7, 1990), Article 228 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 86Da2622 delivered on June 9, 1987 (Gong1987,140) 93Da5093 delivered on April 23, 1993 (Gong1993Ha, 1538) 92Da40587 delivered on July 27, 1993 (Gong1993Ha, 2386) 94Da4288 delivered on May 13, 1994 (Gong194Sang, 1684)

Plaintiff 1 and 8 others, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellee

[Defendant-Appellee] Korea National University of the Republic of Korea

Gwangju High Court Decision 92Na601 delivered on November 17, 1993

All appeals are dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs' grounds of appeal are also examined.

Article 53-2 (2) of the Private School Act (amended by Act No. 4226 of Apr. 7, 1990) provides that "a faculty member of a college educational institution shall be appointed or dismissed by the head of the relevant school for a specified period not exceeding ten years for each title as prescribed by the articles of association of the relevant school." Thus, the above provision cannot be deemed to violate Articles 11 and 22 of the Constitution. In addition, if there is no ground to provide that a faculty member appointed with a contract term under the above provision shall be reappointed to a faculty member whose contract term expires under the articles of association of the school juristic person or the personnel regulations for university faculty members, the faculty member shall naturally lose his status as a professor upon the expiration of the contract term, and thereafter, the president of the Korea Shipbuilding University under the defendant foundation shall confirm and notify the remaining plaintiffs except the plaintiff 9 that he will automatically retire from office at the expiration of the contract term, and therefore, the above plaintiffs shall not have any legal effect between the above plaintiffs and the defendant foundation.

In addition, in light of the records, the fact finding by the court below against the plaintiff 9 is acceptable, and there is no violation of law of misconception of facts due to violation of the rules of evidence.

Although Plaintiff 9 is guaranteed status as a full-time lecturer, the term of appointment is two years pursuant to Article 40(2) of the Articles of incorporation of the defendant corporation, and on March 1, 198, the above plaintiff appointed on February 28, 1990 when the term of appointment expires. Thus, the judgment of the court below does not affect the conclusion of the judgment that the employment relationship has already been terminated.

In addition, the argument that the evaluation and procedure other than the reappointment system is illegal and that there is no ground for removal from position is all relevant to the merits, and the judgment of the court of first instance which affirmed the judgment of the court of first instance which rejected the lawsuit of this case cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing plaintiffs. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)