1. On July 22, 2015, the Defendant rendered a retrial on the revocation of the disposition rejecting the reappointment between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor joining the Defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 1, 2004, the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) was newly appointed as a full-time lecturer for one year of employment at Seoul Arts University B, which was established and operated by the Plaintiff, and was reappointed on several occasions. Finally, on September 1, 2013, the Intervenor was reappointed as an assistant professor for one year of employment.

B. From April 2014, the Plaintiff conducted an examination for promotion and reappointment in the second half of the year of 2014.

On May 19, 2014, the Seoul National University of Arts established the standards for evaluation of achievements for review of reappointment at the second meeting of the second meeting on May 19, 2014, and the short-term appointment teachers of the same year, including the intervenors, determined to conduct an extension of the maximum of 20 points for the 20th semester and the 20th semester as the evaluation period, and to evaluate their achievements by adding them to the core book assessment of the maximum of 80 points.

According to Article 10 (1) of the Plaintiff's Regulations on the Personnel Management of Faculty Members, the terms and conditions of reappointment shall not be less than average 70 points in employment.

C. On June 11, 2014, at the third meeting of 2014, the said Evaluation Committee calculated the achievement evaluation score of the Intervenor as 68.17 points (2.0.8 points for the evaluation of core book 67.37 points). On June 26, 2014, the teachers’ personnel committee of the Seoul National University of Arts recognized the part of the Intervenor’s external specialization among the details of the Intervenor’s vindication at the third meeting, and determined the achievement evaluation score as 68.57 points for the evaluation of the thesis of the academic society (the addition of the evaluation of extension responsibility 0.4 points) on the ground that the part of the Intervenor’s thesis examination was not recognized.

On June 27, 2014, the Plaintiff’s board of directors decided to reject the Intervenor’s reappointment on the grounds that the Intervenor’s performance evaluation scores fall short of 70 points, which are the base points for reappointment, and the president of the Seoul Arts University notified the Intervenor of his refusal to re-appoint the Intervenor on June 30, 2014.

E. On July 29, 2014, the Intervenor rendered a disposition rejecting the Plaintiff’s re-employment.