On October 17, 2013, the defendant made a decision on the Ordinance concerning the Right of Education and the Protection of Educational Activities in Jeollabuk-do.

1. The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of the resolution of the Ordinance of this case and the contents thereof as stated in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (Additional Number omitted).

(1) On October 17, 2013, the Defendant passed a resolution on the Ordinance regarding the Educational Right and the Protection of Educational Activities in Jeollabuk-do (hereinafter “instant Ordinance”).

On October 29, 2013, the Plaintiff issued a request for reconsideration on the ground that “the determination of matters concerning the status and rights of teachers and the protection of educational activities by municipal ordinance is against the legal guarantee on the autonomy of education under Article 31(4) of the Constitution and the principle of teacher status and legalism under Article 31(6) of the Constitution.” However, on November 1, 2013, the Defendant promulgated the Ordinance on the Education of Jeollabuk-do and the Protection of Educational Activities, etc. on November 1, 2013.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff directly filed the instant lawsuit seeking to exclude the effect of the resolution of the Ordinance of this case pursuant to Article 172 (7) of the Local Autonomy Act, which is applied mutatis mutandis by Article 3 of the Local Education Autonomy Act.

(2) The purpose of the Ordinance of this case is to ensure the qualitative improvement of education by prescribing matters necessary for the teaching rights and the protection of educational activities so that teachers may concentrate on educational activities (Article 1), matters concerning the protection of teachers’ educational activities in the event of interference with classes of students or infringement of human rights against teachers (Article 3), matters concerning the status of teachers (Article 6), matters concerning prohibition of discrimination and disadvantage against teachers (Article 7), religious freedom of teachers, freedom of conscience and freedom of privacy (Articles 8, 9, and 10), matters concerning the right to rest of teachers (Article 11), guarantee of teachers’ educational rights and support for the improvement of teachers’ status (Article 13), etc.

2. The validity of the Ordinance of this case (1) pursuant to Articles 22 and 9 of the Local Autonomy Act, local governments may enact ordinances.