1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 2016, the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) made a public announcement of “the second semester professors” at C University operated by the Intervenor (hereinafter “instant public announcement”).

The public notice includes the following: “The matters to be stated in the documents to be submitted, such as a written application for appointment, may be excluded from the examination at the time of submission of the documents required by the principal school, or the appointment may be revoked even after the appointment, and the appointment shall be revoked if the grounds for disqualification are discovered for new appointment of teachers even after the final pass.

B. On September 5, 2016, the Plaintiff submitted “a letter of support for the appointment of teachers” with the same content as the attached Table 1, while supporting the appointment of a full-time teacher of the Dental Non-Retirement Age of C University.

On September 26, 2016, the Plaintiff was appointed as an assistant professor for non-university retirement.

C. On January 31, 2017, the Intervenor revoked the appointment of the Plaintiff on the ground that the same content as the attached Form 1 was false.

(hereinafter “Revocation of the instant appointment”) D.

On March 8, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a petition review with the Defendant seeking the revocation of the appointment of this case. However, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff’s petition review on July 19, 2017 on the ground that “it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff erroneously entered the application in the appointment document, and there was an intention to deceive the Intervenor in the appointment process. Even if the Intervenor recognized and admitted a part of the false entry in the appointment process, it is difficult to view that the revocation of appointment is prohibited in cases where the Plaintiff additionally discovered the false entry after the appointment.”

hereinafter referred to as the "decision of this case"

(ii) [In the absence of dispute over the basis of recognition, entry of Gap 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 evidence, Eul 13 evidence and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Attached Form 2 of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be as follows;

3. Whether the decision of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff's academic background, such as attached Form 1, a summary of the plaintiff's assertion on the existence of grounds for cancellation of appointment, and the records of the thesis.