1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a school foundation that established and operated E schools which are “Variouss of schools” under Article 2 subparag. 7 of the Higher Education Act and F universities which are “cyber college-type lifelong educational facilities” under Article 33(3) of the Lifelong Education Act.

The plaintiffs are teachers working as assistant professors of E schools.

B. Article 29(1) of the Government Organization Act (amended by Act No. 12114, Dec. 24, 2013); Article 3 of the Addenda of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology succeeded to human resources development policies, school education, lifelong education, and academic affairs among the duties of the Minister of Education, Science and Technology.

Before and after the above succession, the Minister of Education shall not distinguish between the above succession and the latter.

[2] As a result of a comprehensive audit against the Defendant in 2012, the Defendant ordered the Defendant to take corrective measures such as 42 cases in relation to social status, 9 administrative measures, and 6 cases in relation to financial measures. The Defendant, following a resolution of the board of directors, applied for authorization for the closure of E schools on April 26, 2013, and the Minister of Education abolished E schools on May 29, 2013 as the Minister of Education revoked on August 31, 2013. 2) As the Plaintiff’s contract for the appointment of teachers was terminated on August 31, 2013, the Plaintiffs applied for reappointment to the Defendant on May 2013.

On June 5, 2013, the Defendant rendered a disposition of refusal of reappointment against H, Plaintiff B, and C, and the Plaintiff B filed an appeal review with the Appeal Commission against the revocation of the said disposition of refusal of reappointment against teachers.

On September 9, 2013, the teachers appeals review committee revoked the above disposition on the ground that the defendant did not go through a resolution of the board of directors.

3) On June 3, 2014, while proceeding with the procedures for examining the reappointment of the Plaintiffs, the President of the E-School and the Faculty Faculty Evaluation Committee (hereinafter “The Faculty Evaluation Committee of this case”) shall be deemed to have been conducted on June 3, 2014.

The evaluation of the achievements of the faculty member evaluation committee of this case against the plaintiffs, "G," who is the chairperson, shall be the minimum horizontal point criteria as shown below.