[1] The method of recognizing a correct answer in a case where the questions to be drawn up in the College College Test do not seek a general academic evaluation or determination of facts, but ask questions as to whether the objective facts themselves are false or not, and where the questions to be drawn up are not inconsistent with objective facts, i.e., truth, by the degree of questions

[2] In a case where: (a) the Korean Institute of Curriculum Evaluation and Planning announced twice a written answer about the issue No. 8 of the World Geographical Ability Test after the completion of the College Ability Test; (b) the examinee Gap, etc. who applied for global geographicalism, applied for an objection to be fingerprinted with the fingerprinting fingerprints; (c) the Institute held a review committee to determine that there is no error in the response; and (d) determined that there was no error in the response; and (b) notified the applicant’s results after determining the grade of the applicants including Gap, etc., the case holding that the determination of the global geographical subject rating for Gap, etc. is unlawful as it deviates from or abused the scope of discretion of the Institute in

[1] Even if the principle of the College Ability Test (hereinafter referred to as the “Education Test”) is to be prepared in accordance with the contents and level of the curriculum at high school so that it can contribute to the normalization of school education, the scope of the curriculum at high school is limited as textbooks is premised on the fact that textbooks contain true information. Therefore, rather than seeking a general academic evaluation or determination as to facts, where the text of the Examination is not to seek a general academic evaluation or determination as to facts, but where the text of the Examination does not coincide with objective facts, i.e., the objective fact-finding, in a case where the text of the Examination does not match with the objective facts, i.e., the average level of examinees who completed the regular high school curriculum can choose the answer according to the degree of the examination, and even if there is no particular impediment in the selection, the purpose of the education which enables students to explore the truth and the existence or absence of the university ability ability by the normal completion of the curriculum at high school curriculum and the answer itself must be determined by the objective answer, i.e., the objective answer is not consistent with the objective truth.

[2] The case holding that, in case where the Korean Institute of Institute of Curriculum Evaluation and Planning (hereinafter referred to as the "Institute") announced the written response of the 8th issue of the World Geographical Ability Test (hereinafter referred to as the "Institute") at the time immediately after the completion of the Institute of Academic Ability Test (hereinafter referred to as the "Institute"), among the examinees applying for global Geographical Studies, Gap et al. filed an objection to be the fingerprints with the lack of objective facts, since the fingerprints was not in conformity with the objective facts; the Institute held a review committee after consultation with the relevant academic society; it decided that there is no error in the correct response; and notified the results of the competent test after determining the grade of the applicants including Gap et al., it should be determined on the basis of 2012 years in light of various circumstances, the right and wrong name of the fingerprints, and in such a case, the 'C/C fingerprint fingerprint fingerprints' is clearly correct, and thus, the 'C/C fingerprint fingerprint fingerprint' is not a correct answer, but the determination of the rating of Gap et al. is unlawful

[1] Article 34(3) of the Higher Education Act; Article 35(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Higher Education Act; Article 45(3)2 of the Regulations on Delegation and Entrustment of Administrative Authority; Article 27 of the Administrative Litigation Act / [2] Article 34(3) of the Higher Education Act; Article 35(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Higher Education Act; Article 45(3)2 of the Regulations on Delegation and Entrustment of Administrative Authority; Article 27 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Plaintiff 1 and 3 others (Attorney Ha-tae et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellee)

Korean Institute of Education and Planning and one other (Law Firm Square et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Seoul Police Agency Decision 2013Guhap29681 decided December 16, 2013

September 4, 2014

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiffs regarding the defendant Institute of Korean Curriculum shall be revoked.

2. On November 27, 2013, the Korea Institute of Education and Planning of the curriculum for the defendant on Korea shall revoke the determination of rating of the global geographical subject of the College College Ability Test in 2014 for the plaintiffs.

3. The plaintiffs' appeal against the defendant Minister of Education is dismissed.

4. The total costs incurred between the plaintiffs and the defendant Korean Institute of Education shall be borne by the defendant Korean Institute of Education, and the costs of appeal incurred between the plaintiffs and the defendant Minister of Education shall be borne by the plaintiffs

The judgment of the first instance court is revoked. On November 27, 2013, the Defendants’ decision on the grade of the global geographical subject of the College College College Test was revoked in 2014.

1. Details of the disposition;

A) Pursuant to Article 34(3) of the Higher Education Act, Article 36 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 45(3)2 of the Regulations on the Delegation and Entrustment of Administrative Authority, Defendant Korea Institute of Education (hereinafter “Defendant Institute”) has performed the work of setting questions, printing, marking, and giving written notice of the results, formulation and implementation of a detailed implementation plan, etc., entrusted by the Defendant Minister of Education.

B) In November 7, 2013, 2014, an examinee took a 600,000 qualifying examination. Of them, 37,684 examinees, including the Plaintiffs, selected the world ties among the subjects of choice in the area of social search and inspection.

C) After the completion of the examination, Defendant IPE announced the following 8 global geographical questions (hereinafter “instant question”) as 1 and 2. (hereinafter “the instant case’s fingerprints” among the instant issues, i.e., fingerprinting 1 and c. (hereinafter “c.C.”). The Plaintiffs did not enter the instant issue in 2. (hereinafter “the instant case’s fingerprinting”). The Plaintiffs indicated “(2012)” on the right side of the map.

A person shall be appointed.

D) In November 2014, some of the examinees who applied for the diversology of the diversity test applied for the objection to the answer of the instant issue on the ground that the fingerprint was not consistent with objective facts, and thus, it did not conform with the objective facts. Defendant Evaluation Institute held a working committee for the examination on November 13, 2013 and decided that there was no error in the response of the instant issue.

E) On November 14, 2013, Defendant IPE requested consultation on the question of this case, the meaning of indication of this year, and the authenticity of this case’s fingerprints, etc. On November 15, 2013, Defendant IPE presented to Defendant IPE an opinion that there was no error in the fixed response of the issue of this case, such as the statement in the “ Opinion of the School” attached Table 1.

F) On November 18, 2013, Defendant Evaluation Institute held an objection review committee to determine that there is no error in the response to the instant issue. On November 27, 2013, Defendant Evaluation Institute decided that the response to the instant issue was ②, based on the premise that the response to the response of the instant issue was the ② number, and notified the Plaintiffs of the 2014-year 2014 test results (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Based on Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1-5, 9, 11, 17, Gap evidence 2-5, 9, 11, 17, Gap evidence 3-6, 11, 14, 20, Eul evidence 5-1, 2, Eul evidence 4, Eul evidence 13, Eul evidence 16, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the litigation against the defendant is legitimate;

In principle, an administrative litigation seeking the revocation of an administrative disposition must be the defendant with the administrative agency that conducted an administrative disposition under his/her external name, which is the subject of the lawsuit. On the other hand, the defendant education did not conduct the instant disposition against the plaintiffs. Therefore, the defendant of the lawsuit of this case seeking the revocation of the disposition of this case

Therefore, the plaintiffs' lawsuit against the defendant Minister of Education is unlawful.

3. Determination as to the claim against the defendant Evaluation Institute

A. The parties' assertion

1) The plaintiffs' assertion

A) procedural defect

Since the objection to the reply of the instant issue is a serious objection, the defendant Evaluation Institute received the objection to the reply of the instant issue, and immediately requested the relevant academic council to provide advice. However, on November 13, 2013, the defendant Evaluation Institute held a working committee for the examination of the objection to the instant issue without consultation with the relevant academic council and decided that there is no error in the response of the instant issue. After making the aforementioned decision, the defendant Evaluation Institute requested consultation with the Korea Association of Economic Geographical Studies and the Korea Association of Environmental Education. In addition, the defendant Evaluation Institute did not hold a deliberation committee on the objection to the reply of the instant issue but decided on the objection to the reply of the instant issue.

Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful on the ground that procedural defects exist.

B) A deviation from and abuse of discretionary power in the setting of the instant issue

The fingerprints in this case seems to refer to the total production amount of the European Union (EU, the EU) and the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and the total production amount of the European Union (NAP) and the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAP), but did not present a comparison point, so the total production amount cannot be compared; the total production amount is domestic total production; whether it is a citizen’s total production; whether it is a citizen’s general production (Gros NNP; GNI); if the fingerprints in this case was to ask for a general tendency or trend of the total production amount of the European Union and the North America Free Trade Agreement, it does not have any significant error in the fingerprints in itself in light of the following: (a) if the fingerprints in this case was not presented, the general tendency or tendency is not presented.

In addition, the fingerprint of this case did not present the necessary comparison point in comparison with the total production amount. Considering the fact that the map included in the issue of this case is indicated in the year 2012, the time when comparing the total production amount of the European Union and the North America Free Trade Agreement with the fingerprint of this case should be 2012 years according to the marking of the year of this case, and as the total production amount of the North America Free Trade Agreement is more than the total production amount of the European Union, the fingerprint of this case is objectively clear and clear.

Taking account of these circumstances, the instant fingerprint is not a fingerprints which can be interpreted in a multi-level manner, but rather an objective molding fingerprint, and there is no answer to the instant issue. Defendant Evaluation Institute set up a matter so that the examinee at an average level can not choose a legitimate answer port, thereby deviating from and abusing the discretionary power permissible in the setting of objective questions. Accordingly, the instant disposition by the Defendant Evaluation Institute, which determined the global rating of the Plaintiffs, is unlawful.

2) Defendant Evaluation Institute’s assertion

A) Parts of procedural defects

According to the veterinary Examination Basic Plan, if necessary, the relevant academic council may request consultation from the relevant academic council, but it does not necessarily require the relevant academic council's consultation, and it is an objection to finally determine whether an objection is an important issue. As such, it is a review committee to make a decision on whether the objection is an important issue as classified by the relevant working committee for review. Therefore, as long as the relevant academic council requests consultation on the fixed answer of the instant issue and receives an opinion before the meeting of the review committee, it cannot be said that there is a procedural defect in the instant disposition on the ground that the relevant academic council requested consultation on the fixed answer of the instant issue after the meeting of the review committee for review.

B) Whether the fingerprints of this case has been affixed or not

According to the Dogian Text 2 of the World Geographical Textbook as a high school curriculum, the scope of the Dogian Textbook 2 is interpreted as a correct fingerprint, and the subject is explained as a general tendency on the relationship between economic blocks, and does not provide an explanation on the basis of a specific year, and the view of general concepts and principles, etc. is the direction of comprehensive evaluation rather than the bitrative knowledge, which is the world of high school. The purpose of the Dogian Test is to provide a measurement on whether the contents presented in high school curriculum are properly understood and appropriate, so it cannot be concluded that the Dogian subject is impossible to determine the Dogian subject because it did not present the standard point of time to compare the total amount of production, and the indication of this year is merely merely the fact that the guidance presented in the issue of this case indicates that "the distribution of member countries of the European Union and the North America Free Trade Agreement", and it is extremely extremely difficult to compare the economic statistics that do not go from the Dogian subject with the Dogian subject.

C) Whether to deviate from and abuse discretion of the setting of the issue of this case

Even without considering the contents of the textbook, the average total production amount from 2007 to 2011 was higher than that of the North America FTA. As such, the fingerprints of this case can be right fingerprints according to the time. If the conclusion of the common textbook contents and the implications of the textbook differs, the examinee must set a correct answer on the basis of the textbook as a matter of course without any separate instruction, and if a high school curriculum is completed faithfully as a general and average characteristic, it is sufficiently possible to see the genuine preparation intention of the fingerprint of this case to compare the economic environment as a general and average characteristic, and to remove the correct answer by way of clearly comparing the text and answer, etc. by comparing and reviewing the contents of the answer. Thus, there is no deviation and abuse of discretion in the issue of this case.

B. Facts of recognition

The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of each evidence, evidence Nos. 4, evidence Nos. 8, 12, 13, evidence No. 1, evidence No. 2, Eul No. 2, evidence No. 6, Eul No. 7-1, 15-2, and Eul No. 15-1, and 2, the fact-finding of the nationwide school teachers' meetings of this court, and the whole purport of arguments.

1) High school curriculum

The “elementary and Secondary School curriculum” (amended by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology No. 2009-41, Dec. 23, 2009; hereinafter “2009 amended curriculum”) contains the following contents as to the global curriculum of high school.

2. The objective of the world interest is to comprehensively understand the geographical phenomenon of each region in the world, to seek ways to cooperate and to coexist with each other in the era of globalization, and to foster attitude of endeavoring to develop, use, and preserve the base of life in the global perspective. (a) It has the ability to understand systematically and comprehensively the various natural environment and human environment in the world; (6) It is becoming important for countries and regions to promote economic cooperation through globalization of the world's economic activities. Accordingly, the economic block based on the region has been formed, and the free trade agreement (FTA) is also important. Moreover, it is important to understand the concept of community knowledge and value-based information and to understand the concept of community-based culture and to understand the concept of community-based culture and to understand the concept of community-based culture, and to understand and understand the development of new knowledge and value-based culture in the era of globalization.

2) Master plans, etc. to conduct the 2014 Do 2014

A) On March 29, 2013, Defendant Evaluation Institute announced the master plan to conduct hydro-performance tests (hereinafter “master plan to conduct hydro-performance tests”) on March 29, 2013, and the main contents thereof are as follows.

1. The purpose of the Examination is to measure the external ability of education required for university education; to contribute to the normalization of high school education by setting up the level and content of the curriculum; to provide an examination with credibility and objectivity high-level screening data based on the characteristics of each subject; 2. the basic direction for setting questions is to be set in accordance with the contents and standards of high school curriculum so that it can contribute to the normalization of school education. 3. The following questions are to be drawn in accordance with the basic concept and principles of high school curriculum so that ○○ high school curriculum can be completed normally and understand the important concepts and principles, and to measure the thinking of accidents such as reasoning, analysis, integration, evaluation, etc. from 7. The scope of education, society, science, study and foreign language, and the 2.1. The purpose of the Examination is to provide the examination of questions with the understanding of the concept and content of the school and the 3.0.

B) On July 1, 2013, Defendant Evaluation Institute publicly announced the detailed plan for the implementation of the hydro-performance test (hereinafter “detailed plan for hydro-performance test”) on July 1, 2014, and the main contents are as follows.

The schedule* problem and the response processing procedure in the main sentence - the 2014-year 2014 processing period for filing an objection: The filing period: the processing period from November 7, 2013 to November 11, 2013 - the processing period: the date of filing an objection: the filing period from November 12, 2013 to November 18, 2013; the date of the final reply: the date of holding a working committee for the review on November 18, 2013: the date of holding the meeting of the working committee for the review on November 17, 2013: the date of November 13, 2013 to November 15, 2013; the processing period for filing an objection; the processing of the objection; the preparation of material and response to the objection; the processing period of the decision made by the working committee for review; the important matters that are not assigned from this working committee for review to the ○○ 13:108.14.

(iii) publicity materials for the College Ability Test in 2014;

From March 8, 2013, Defendant Evaluation Institute posted on its website “The 2014-year College Ability Test Promotion Data (PPP, CUA, and this preparation)”, and the posted “the 2014-year 2014-year 2014-year 201-203 201-2(hereinafter referred to as “Guidebook”) includes the following:

The ○○○○ 2014, contained in the main text, is also to be drawn up by the subject of a high school, in principle, with the focus on the major characteristics and subjects of the College Ability Test. The scope of setting questions and the scope of setting questions and special features, and the scope of setting questions in the area of social search centers shall be in accordance with the 2009 Amendment Curriculum (Public Notice No. 2009-41 of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology). The contents and the subject of evaluation shall be in accordance with the scope and level of curriculum, and the contents and implications that may be connected with textbooks and other materials and daily lives shall be written in addition to the contents and implications that may be connected with textbooks. - The contents related to the subject of study in the field of study and social search center, which are dealt with with in the media, such as newspapers or broadcasting, shall be read and its meaning shall

4) Guidelines, etc. for the examination of water ability of the defendant Evaluation Institute

In 2014, Defendant Evaluation Institute’s 2014 School Ability Test Guidelines (Social Search Site) provides that “The choice of evaluation or evaluation materials shall be based on the scope of curriculum and its level, and shall include as much diverse contents as possible without focusing on the contents of textbooks.” “The contents and implications that may be contacted with materials other than textbooks or daily life shall be included in the preparation of textbooks.” If statistical data are used in a written presentation in the text of literature production guidelines, it shall be prepared as much as possible so that they can be collected as possible and used and the answer sheet can be removed from the answer point of view. The examination guidelines of Defendant Evaluation Institute’s 2014 School Ability Test also in 2014 shall also be prepared to find the most possible latest data where statistical data are used, and whether the text and answer, the contents of the presentation, the contents of the presentation, and the contents of the curriculum are consistent, and it may be difficult to review the contents and contents of the curriculum beyond the extent of the curriculum, and it may be difficult for Defendant Evaluation Institute to examine the contents and contents of the curriculum too difficult.

5) Contents of the High School Global Textbooks

The World Geographical Textbook (25 pages) published in the school affairs states, “When Korea, Japan, and China enters into a free trade agreement, it is anticipated that Korea, Japan, and China will be injured to the world-wide integrated market following the North America Free Trade Agreement, North America, and the world-wide integrated market.” The maps indicated together with the above contents state USD 18,387 billion, and the total amount of production of the European Union is USD 16,467 billion, based on the international statistical reduction in 2009, and the total amount of production of the North America FTA is USD 16,467 billion. The World Geographical Textbook (125 pages) with which the education was published is indicated as follows.”

A) Global Textbooks for publication of school affairs (No. 225 pages)

A person shall be appointed.

B) Global Textbook 125 pages of the World Institute Textbook for astronomical Reeducation

A person shall be appointed.

(vi) the total production amount of the European Union and the North America FTA.

According to the statistical data published by the World Bank for International Bank for 2007 to 2012, the average of the production of the European Union and the countries which have joined the Free Trade Agreement for 2007 to 2012 was more than the 17.35 billion US dollars, while the aggregate of the production of the European Union was 19.8886 billion US dollars in the 2012 Free Trade Agreement, the aggregate of the production of the 2000 US dollars in the 2012 FTA was 16.4 billion US dollars in the 205 North Korea's total production from 16.6 billion US dollars in the 2012 FTA, and the aggregate of the production of the 2005 US dollars in the 2012 FTA was 19.7 billion US dollars in the 2000,000 EU's total production from 200,000 US dollars in the 2012 FTA.

In full view of these various statistical data, due to economic confusion caused by the global financial crisis in 2008, the total production amount of the European Union and the North America Free Trade Agreement has been accumulated more than the total production amount of the European Union, and this trend has continued after 2012 and until the date of the instant water testing in 2013.

7) The main contents of this Court’s fact-finding results are as follows.

A. In comparison with the European Union and the North America Free Trade Agreement, it is impossible to compare the total production amount without the reference year. It is reasonable to present statistics with the numerical value indicating the reference year in cases where the economic gap, such as the European Union and the North America Free Trade Agreement, is not significant and the economic difference is changing. (b) Other comparison time has not been presented in fingerprint, so it can be seen as the reference year as indicated in the map. (c) Since statistical data were not presented in the instant case, it is not reasonable to determine the staticity of the instant fingerprint based solely on the statistical data before 2010 because it was not presented, it may be considered as the basis for the statistical data before 2010. If the scale of the economy changes according to the standard year, it should be considered by students based on the statistical data before 2012 or 2012, the problem should be prepared by the presenter, taking into account the characteristics of the region’s fingerprints, and it should be clear that the standard changes in the world’s fingerprint content will change clearly at the present time.

8) The media organizations, including Korean newspapers, etc., have continued to report the contents of the Free Trade Agreement negotiations between Korea and China and Japan as an important issue on several occasions from November 2012 to November 2013, 2013, including “Korea, China and Japan, upon entering into a Korea-China Free Trade Agreement, which is USD 18,000, USD 17,5,000 to USD 6,000,000, and a regional integrated market at the third level around the world.”

C. Relevant provisions

[Attachment 2] The entry in the relevant regulations is as follows.

D. Determination

1) Determination as to whether procedural defects exist

The Native Test Master Plan states that “The relevant academic council (or external experts) shall be requested to provide advice on serious matters (including questions, answers errors, and questions likely to violate the curriculum),” and that “at least three external experts, who are not members preparing committee, shall be present at each area, and the relevant academic council (or external experts), if necessary, shall be requested to provide advice.” According to the Native Test Plan, if an objection is received, the Native Committee shall classify the matters raised by the Native Committee as simple and important matters, and shall classify the matters raised by the objection as important matters, and determine the response details on the raised matters, and then the important matters shall be referred to the EN Examination Committee, and the Committee shall be held to deliberate and confirm the matters determined by the ENA and shall be classified as important matters, and shall be dealt with.

On the other hand, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the aforementioned facts and the purport of the entire arguments, i.e., the defendant Evaluation Institute’s decision to the effect that there is no error in the response to the instant issue, etc. on November 18, 2013; ii) the final decision on the objection to the objection to the question is an objection not a working committee for the examination; thus, as long as the defendant Evaluation Institute requested consultation on the reply to the instant issue and received the opinion before the meeting of the Examination Committee, it is difficult to deem that the request for consultation on the reply to the instant issue from the Korean Association of Economic Geographical Studies and the Korea Association of Environmental Education after the meeting of the Examination Working Committee was made, and it is difficult to deem that there is a defect in the relevant meeting to undergo consultation on the reply to the instant issue, not the related working committee for the Examination Committee, in light of the fact that it is necessary to undergo consultation, etc.

Therefore, this part of the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

2) Determination as to whether or not to deviate from or abuse the discretion of setting up the issue of this case

A) Relevant legal principles

In general, the preparing commissioner who prepares an examination as an administrative act has discretion in the sense that he/she can freely determine what kind of matter is within the permissible scope of the provisions of the Acts and subordinate statutes, and what terms and answers can be formed by using the text and answer forms of the examination. However, since the discretionary authority has an inherent limit that should be exercised properly in the contents and composition of the preparation so as to assess the ability of the examinees in line with the purpose of the examination, the act of preparing the examination is unlawful if the exercise of the discretionary authority exceeds the limit. Meanwhile, when the composition of the text or answer forms or the choice of the language in the preparation of the objective questions is too wrong, so that the number of examinees at an average level can not choose a legitimate answer port, even if the number of examinees at an average level is deviates or abused from discretion, but it is not a deviation or abuse of discretionary authority, unless there is any special reason.

In addition, due to the nature of the objective test questions, the degree of preparation and the instructions for the selection of the answer questions shall be objectively grasped and assessed in the test questions themselves, and without any special circumstances, it cannot be determined by writing the intent of the preparing questions at will beyond the limit of the text, but it is not explicitly determined by the text, but rather by the comprehensive analysis of the text and answer questions, and the instructions for the selection of the answer questions clearly and implicitly through the comprehensive analysis of the text and answer questions are determined. As such, the examinee shall mutually compare and examine the contents of the text and answer questions in accordance with the aforementioned explicit and implied instructions and put only one appropriate for the most appropriate answer (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Du17267, Jul. 14, 201).

Meanwhile, even if the principle of setting questions is prepared in accordance with the contents and level of the curriculum of high school so that it can contribute to the normalization of school education, the scope of setting questions is limited as the textbook of high school is premised on the fact that the textbook contains true information. Therefore, if the text of setting questions is not subject to general academic evaluation or determination of facts, but is asked whether it is objective facts itself, i.e., objective facts, and if the draft questions are not consistent with the intention of setting questions, even though the students at an average level who has completed the curriculum of high school can choose the answer which is scheduled to answer by the degree of setting questions, and even if they do not receive any obstacle to the selection, the purpose of setting questions in high school and the characteristics of the able examination that measure the existence or absence of school ability by normal completion of the curriculum of high school and the text itself require students to select the answer questions that conform to objective facts, it is not consistent with the intention of setting questions, but should not be recognized as the objective answer, i.e., the objective answer, not only the truth and answer.

B) Whether to deviate from and abuse discretion of the setting of the issue of this case

(1) Contents and answers of the instant issue

(a) the meaning of 2012, expressed in the guidance (the existence of the base year);

The issue of this case is divided into ‘A' through geographical location, and ‘B' is intended to inform the member states of the Free Trade Agreement. However, if ‘B' is indicated in the guide which is ‘The Data Industry Promotion Act' in 2012, it is not written within the fingerprints of this case and it is extremely rare to draw up the problem of comparing the latest economic statistics that are not going to the textbook, so it cannot be interpreted as asking whether the total production of any area among the Free Trade Agreements between the European Union and the North America on the basis of 2012, is larger than the total production of any area among the textbooks of the European Union and the North America on the basis of the textbook of 2009 revision curriculum.

In the event that the questions, questions, questions, and answers are composed of questions, questions, and answers, all of the questions, questions, questions, and answers shall conform to the truth as well as logical consistency, and as long as exceptions are not separately indicated, the question will be the basis for selecting the answer questions as a correct answer.

The question of this case is that "the guidance represents the member states A and B of the regional economic cooperation body. It is true that only the correct explanation about A and B is made in the Referer>", and there is no standard year in this question itself.

However, in the case of the issue of this case: (a) inasmuch as the paragraph (1) states “B(3) as it appears,” the period of appearance of “B is required to determine whether the paragraph (1) has been correct at the base point of time; and (b) it does not seem to require a separate reference year. However, as the contents of each fingerprint are likely to vary due to the change or development of policies, politics, economy, society, culture, or cultural situation of the North America Free Trade Agreement or the European Union, and the change or development of policies, politics, economy, society, culture, etc. of the European Union, the base point of time is required to be specified in order to clearly determine the errors (However, in the case of paragraph (4) and paragraph (4) of this case, the base point of time seems to be not necessary to be determined separately because there is no significant change from the movement of each economic cooperation body to the present (However, in the case of paragraph (2).

Meanwhile, as of 2012, the guidance set out in the problem of this case indicates the current status of each member state of the European Union and the North America Free Trade Agreement as of 2012, wherein the questionnaire 5) demands that the answer be made on the basis of the guidance set out in the question of this case. As such, when the question is combined with the guidance set out in the question of this case to reorganize the problem in descriptive form, the problem eventually consists of "Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Austria, Austria, Austria, Austria, Austria, Austria, Austria, Belgium, Belgium, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, the United Kingdom, the United Kingdom, the United Kingdom, the United Kingdom, the Ireland, the United Kingdom, the United Kingdom, the ASEAN, the ASEAN, the ASEAN, and the regional economic cooperation of the United States."

In addition, Defendant Evaluation Institute's guidelines for examination of water performance tests are also required to examine the consistency of the text and answer, and the contents of presentation. Defendant Evaluation Institute's guidelines for the preparation of the College Ability Test in 2014 also allows Defendant Evaluation Institute to search for the latest data available if statistical data are used in the text presented as literature production guidelines. Defendant Evaluation Institute in 2014 announced on March 29, 2013 also in the direction of preparing the social search sphere among the implementation plans for water performance tests, the contents and selection of materials shall be based on the scope and level of curriculum and shall be included in the preparation of materials or contents other than textbooks that have implications in daily life. In light of the Free Trade Agreement between Korea and China, from November 2012 to November 2013, the issue of whether the contents of the evaluation are integrated into the free trade agreement between Korea and China, which is one of the most important issues in the free trade agreements between Korea and China, which is the scale of 170 million U.S. dollars or 175 billion.

The defendant Evaluation Institute asserts that the guidance presented in the issue of this case is "the distribution limit of members of the European Union and North America Free Trade Agreements 2012" and that it is not indicated in the fingerprint of this case because it is difficult to see that the determination of the European Union's accession to Croatia does not affect the determination of the errors of each fingerprint of this case, so it is difficult to see that there is any confusion or misunderstanding as to the determination of the results of the examination of the examination of this case's fingerprint of this case's fingerprint of this case's fingerprint of this case's fingerprint of this case's fingerprint of this case's fingerprint of this case's 2013 as croatia newly joined the European Union, so it is difficult for the examination of whether the examination of the results of the examination of this case's 209 revision curriculum of this case's croatia of this case's 200 years, not only the contents of the textbook of this case's 20 years, but also the changes after the examination of this case's fingerprint of this case's 2 years.

(B) The error in the fingerprints of this case

Ultimately, the standard point of time to determine the right and wrong of the fingerprints of this case is 2012 as indicated in the map, and the total production amount after 2010 and the average total production amount from 2007 to 2012 exceeds the European Union, as seen earlier, is the same as that of the North America FTA. Therefore, the fingerprint of this case is deemed to be the fingerprint whose identity is clearly stated.

The comparison of simple information, such as statistical values for a specific year, is not possible. The EU claims that the fingerprints of this case is a witness because the statistics from 2007 to 2011 are academicly meaningful statistics, and the average total production amount was high during the above period. However, the issue of the direction of the drawing and the answer can not be determined by writing the subjective drawing which is hiddenly, without any special circumstance. The question of this case can not be solved because the author's intention is inferred as alleged by the defendant Institute, which is not explicitly instructed in the problem, and this part of the argument of the defendant Institute is without merit, and it is difficult to accept the result of the academic consultation of the academic societies related to the premise as alleged in this part of the defendant Institute.

(2) Whether the discretion is deviates or abused

Of the instant issues, “A” fingerprints refers to “A” that “the number of foreign capital investments in Mexico has rapidly increased as a result of the appearance of the North America Free Trade Agreement,” and as a result of the conclusion of the North America Free Trade Agreement, it accords with objective facts that the increased number of foreign capital investments in Mexico is consistent with the objective fact, and thus, it is obviously correct fingerprints.” The “B” fingerprints is a clearly shot fingerprints because it does not impose joint customs duties on the Republic of Korea and the North America Free Trade Agreement, and thus is not a clearly shot fingerprints.” The term “B” fingerprints is called as “The North America Free Trade Agreement has a large weight in the reverse trade than the EU,” while the European Union has a large weight in the reverse trade than the North America Free Trade Agreement.

Therefore, since the right fingerprints among the fingerprints of this case is only one of the "1" fingerprints, there is no answer to the problem of this case, and there is no choice to see this problem itself, and it is reasonable to deem that such an error has reached the degree that the examinee who knows the difference between the North America Free Trade Agreement and the European Union's total output in 2012 prevents him from properly grasping the meaning of the text or answer and selecting the answer. Accordingly, the plaintiffs' assertion in this part is with merit.

C) Sub-determination

Ultimately, given that the right fingerprints among the fingerprints of this case is outside the “A” fingerprint, the determination of the plaintiffs’ rating in 2014 on the premise that the due answer to the issue of this case is ②, based on the premise that the answer to the question of this case is the two times, is unlawful, because it deviates from or abused the scope of discretion of the Defendant Evaluation Institute in the preparation and grading of the hydro-performance test.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' lawsuits against the defendant Minister of Education against the defendant are dismissed, and the claims against the defendant Evaluation Institute shall be accepted with merit. Since the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant Evaluation Institute is unfair with different conclusions, this part of the appeal against the plaintiffs is accepted, and the part against the plaintiffs against the defendant Evaluation Institute in the judgment of first instance against the defendant Evaluation Institute is revoked, and the part against the defendant Evaluation Institute in the judgment of first instance against the plaintiffs is revoked, and the part against the defendant Education in the judgment of first instance against the defendant Evaluation Institute in the judgment of first instance is just, and this part of the

[Attachment 1] Opinion of the Academy: omitted

[Attachment 2] Relevant Provisions: omitted

Judges Lee Jung-Jon (Presiding Judge)

1) The statistical source of the World Bank: htp:/d. Research source of the World Bank's statistical data: htp: /D.www.org/indidicator/N.GDP.MKP. The International Monetary Fund: htp:/www./www.imf.org/www/p”bs/webs//2012/02/weddatis/orettt.px (Wordlord Enomic Onomic Onomic Onomic Ocalbabbbbasese, Ocber 2012 from among Dat and Mattas): United Nations statistical source: htp://en. wirepiedia.org/wik/Letist-Oblict Book-2012).

2) In 2013, the total production amount (USF: USD 19.85.7 billion, USD 19.88,87.6 billion) of the North America Free Trade Agreement was higher than the total production amount of the European Union (USF: USD 17.5,12.1 billion, USD 17.350.9 billion, USD 17.350.9 billion). The source of data: http://en. Simpedia.org/wikdi/Listisf-typeo-typeo-typeo-typeo-typeo-type-type-type type-type type-type (nom).

Note 3) “(1) as the appearance of Section B, foreign capital investment in Mexico increased rapidly.”

Note 4) “b. A and B impose joint customs duties outside the country. c. A are larger than B. d. B. B are larger in total trade in the country than A. B.

Note 5) “The guidance indicates the member countries A and B of the regional economic cooperation body. It is true that only the correct explanation to A and B is in Ethical>