1. On June 2, 2016, the Defendant’s decision to dismiss a request for review of a teacher’s petition filed against the Plaintiff is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

On March 1, 1978, the plaintiff was newly appointed as the teacher of the Bupyeong District Office of Education B, and on March 1, 2012, the plaintiff was promoted to the principal of the Busan District Office of Education C elementary school.

On December 3, 2015, before the expiration of the term of office of the first principal, the Plaintiff submitted to the Superintendent of the Gyeonggi-do Office of Education a letter of wishing to appoint a senior teacher when he/she withdraws from the middle of the principal.

On February 1, 2016, the superintendent of the Gyeonggi-do Office of Education issued a personnel order to appoint the plaintiff to the senior teacher of the D Elementary School as of March 1, 2016, without making a middle-standing recommendation as the plaintiff's senior disqualified person as the principal of the school.

(2) The lower court rejected the Plaintiff’s petition for the first instance judgment on March 30, 2016 on the ground that the Plaintiff’s petition for the second instance is rejected and appointed as the principal teacher, and that the Plaintiff’s petition for the second instance judgment was rejected on March 30, 2016. In so doing, the lower court rejected the Plaintiff’s petition for the second instance judgment on June 2, 2016 on the ground that “The Plaintiff’s petition for the second instance judgment does not constitute an administrative disposition subject to the Plaintiff’s petition for the second instance judgment, because it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff had the right to file

(2) In light of the legal principles and purport of the Public Educational Officials Act regarding the appointment of the principal of the first school and the appointment of the principal of the school, the decision of this case is unlawful on the other premise that the Plaintiff, who completed the term of office of the principal of the first school, has the right to request the appointment authority to appoint the principal of the school again. Thus, the decision of this case, which dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for the examination of the appeal on the other premise, is unlawful.

It shall be as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

Judgment

As to the affirmative action by the people of the relevant legal principles.