The case holding that it cannot be deemed that abuse or deviation from discretionary power of private education in determining the scope of subject matter of applicants at the time of high school entrance scores, which are the basis for calculating the internal results of successful applicants in the examination of university entrance;

Summary of the summary

Article 27 of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 111, Article 111-2 of the Education Act, Article 71-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act

Kim Ga-Jin

A school foundation or a prestigious school.

Seoul High Court Decision 91Na11075 delivered on November 13, 1991

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The judgment of the court below shall be revoked.

In relation to the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Plaintiff confirmed that the Plaintiff was a successful applicant for the entrance examination of the Art College in 1991.

1. Determination on the principal safety defense of the defendant educational foundation

The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff was a successful applicant for the entrance examination of the Department of Art University in 1991, which is established under the defendant school foundation, and that the plaintiff sought confirmation against the defendant school foundation. The defendant school foundation asserted that the matters concerning the entrance examination of the above university should be carried out by the president of the above university in accordance with the Education Act and the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. Thus, the defendant school foundation has no standing to be a party. Thus, even if the head of the above school provides that all matters including the entrance examination of the school shall be carried out under the Education Act and the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, it is only a provision regulating internal relations, and in external legal relations, the school is merely one educational facility operated by the school foundation and thus, it becomes a school foundation operating the above school, which is not a party to the lawsuit, and therefore, the above main defense of the defendant school foundation is without merit.

2. Judgment on the merits

(a) All universities or colleges (including pre-qualifications of the above school juristic person) including Defendant 1’s school juristic persons shall calculate the academic achievement of the applicants who passed the first 191 university or college entrance examination for the first 7th grade, according to the above 191 "Guidelines for the Implementation of High School Career within 191". According to the above guidelines sent to each university or college for the implementation of high school academic achievement tests in 191, each university or college's academic achievement score for the same 9th grade as that of the applicants who passed the first 16th college or university's academic achievement examination for the first 9. The plaintiff shall be given the applicants who passed the examination for the first 9th grade examination for the total academic achievement of the above 97 college or college's academic achievement, and the applicants who obtained the same academic achievement as that of the applicants who passed the examination for the first grade examination for the first grade school or college's academic achievement for the first grade examination for the first grade. In the case of the applicants who completed the examination for the first grade examination for the first grade examination (the first grade examination for the university or college's.

B. The plaintiff asserts that the above university violated the above guidelines for the delivery of literature by providing applicants including art colleges (industrial art department, craft department, crymology department), and the physical skill department (sports department, art department, crymology department) in the art and physical skill department (sports department, physical education department) with the range of applicants other than the music colleges (i.e., pianian department, symology department, symology department) in the art and physical skill department (i.e., art department, art department, art department, symology department) in calculating the plaintiff's internal aptitude level, and thereby giving the plaintiff a lower grade than that of calculating the internal aptitude level for each university. Thus, if the plaintiff did not so, the plaintiff could have failed to pass the examination for the admission of the above university without any reason, the plaintiff's legitimate admission examination by the defendant educational foundation.

살피건대, 성립에 다툼이 없는 갑 제1호증의 1,2, 을 제1호증, 을 제2호증, 을 제4호증의 1,2, 을 제5호증의 1,2, 을 제6호증, 을 제10호증의 1 내지 9의 각 기재에 변론의 전취지를 종합하면, 위 대학교의 1991학년도 신입생모집요강에 따르면, 위 대학교 미술대학 회화과 정원은 한국화 14명, 서양화 16명으로 하고, 전형방법은 학력고사 성적, 고등학교 내신성적 및 실기고사 성적을 각각 30:30:40의 비율로 반영하여 그 총성적순에 따라 합격자를 선발하도록 되어 있는 사실, 한편, 문교부가 1991학년도 대학입시 전형에서의 고등학교성적 내신제 시행을 위하여 각 대학에 송부한 "1991학년도 고등학교성적내신제시행지침"에 따라 위 대학교가 1991학년도 예·체능계열(사범계열의 체육교육과 포함)의 경우 고졸학력 검정고시 합격자의 내신성적 산출의 기본이 되는 동일한 학력고사점수 고교출신 응시자의 대상범위를 정함에 있어 원칙적으로 계열전체의 응시자를 대상으로 하되 학력고사성적, 고교내신성적, 실기고사성적의 반영비율 및 배점이 동 계열내 무용과, 미술대학, 체육교육과와 크게 다른 음악대학만은 따로 분리하기로 하여 {무용과, 미술대학, 체육교육과는 학력고사 총점(체력장 포함):고교내신:실기고사의 반영비율 및 배점이 각각 30(340점):30(340점),40[453.3점, 다만, 체육교육과는 실기고사 성적 30(340점)에 면접점수 5(56.7점), 교직적성 및 인성검사 점수 5(56.7점)]인 데 반해, 음악대학은 그 반영비율 및 배점이 각각 20(340점):30(510점):50(850점)이어서 내신성적 중 교과성적의 등급간 점수차가 무용과, 미술대학, 체육교육과의 경우는 4.7점이나 음악대학은 7점이 된다} 무용과, 미술대학, 체육교육과는 무용과, 미술대학, 체육교육과의 응시자 전체를 대상으로 하고, 음악대학은 음악대학 응시자만을 대상으로 하기로 한 사실, 위 대학교에서는 위 사정원칙에 따라 체육교육과, 무용과, 미술대학(산업미술과, 공예과, 회화과) 응시자 중 원고와 동일한 학력고사점수 147점을 얻은 고교출신자의 내신등급을 평균(소수 첫째자리에서 반올림)하여 원고의 내신등급을 산출한 결과 7등급이 됨에 따라 {(8+8+7+7+7+7+8+8+4+6+8+7+6+5+6+2)/16=6.5} 그에 따라 내신성적 307.7점을 부여하고, 여기에 원고가 획득한 실기고사성적 401.9점과 체력장 점수 20점을 합한 원고의 총성적 876.6점이 한국화 정원 14명 내 최저합격점수인 881.7점에 미달되므로 원고를 불합격처리한 사실, 만일 원고가 응시한 미술대학의 응시자만을 대상으로 원고의 내신등급을 산출할 경우 원고의 내신등급은 6등급이 되고 {(7+8+8+4+6+8+7+6+5+6+2)/11=6.09} 그에 따른 내신성적 313.1점을 합한 원고의 총성적은 882.0점이 되어 위 한국화 전공 합격자 중 최저점수인 881.7점을 상회하게 되지만, 위 미술대학이 속한 예·체능계열 전체 {체육교육과, 무용과, 미술대학(산업미술과, 공예과, 회화과), 음악대학(피아노과, 관현악과, 성악과, 작곡과)}의 응시자를 대상으로 원고의 내신등급을 산출하게 되면 원고의 내신등급은 7등급이 되어 {(8+8+7+7+7+7+8+8+4+6+8+7+6+5+6+2+7+7+10)/19=6.73} 결국 불합격하게 되는 사실을 인정할 수 있고 반증이 없다.

According to the above facts, the "Guidelines for Implementation of New School Career 191" sent to each university or college's music records is to be determined on the average grade of high school applicants who obtained the same score as that of the applicant who passed the examination in the same department as that of the applicant who passed the examination of high school grade in calculating the academic achievement of the above 191 university or college. Since there is no room for discretion to limit the scope of the academic achievement by each university or college, since each university or college has the same academic achievement as that of the applicant who passed the examination of the above 191 university or college's music records, it is not unreasonable to determine the scope of the applicants who passed the examination of the same academic achievement as that of the applicant who passed the examination of the above 2nd university or college's academic achievement, or to determine the scope of the applicants who passed the examination of the same academic achievement as that of the applicant who passed the examination of the above 2nd university or college's basic academic achievement by taking into account the reasonableness, fairness, or non-educational factors, it is unreasonable to determine the same academic achievement as the applicant's.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court below is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff who has lost. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Ansan-dae (Presiding Judge) (Presiding Judge)