[1] Whether a school juristic person with disciplinary authority can institute an administrative litigation against a decision made by the Teachers Disciplinary Review Committee

[2] Whether Article 10 (3) of the Special Act on the Improvement of Teachers' Status is unconstitutional

[1] In full view of the provisions of Article 9 of the Special Act on the Improvement of Teachers' Status, a teacher of a private school subject to disciplinary action may file an administrative suit against a decision made by the Teachers Disciplinary Review Committee in accordance with the Ministry of Education, and Article 10 (2) and (3) of the same Act, only the teacher who has filed the request for a disciplinary action with the Teachers Disciplinary Review Committee, and the school juristic person subject to disciplinary action cannot file an administrative suit against the person entitled to disciplinary action, on the ground that the same Act does not mention any action against the person entitled to disciplinary action, the person entitled to disciplinary action may not be deemed to have filed administrative litigation pursuant to Article 12 of the Administrative Litigation

[2] Even though a private school teacher is appointed and dismissed by a school juristic person or an operator of a private school, and the relationship between a private school teacher and a school juristic person is not considered as the power relationship in the public law, it is provided that a private school is an educational institution in charge of the daily interest of national public education and its establishment, operation, and appointment, dismissal, etc. under the Educational Act and the Private School Act that is subject to guidance, supervision, support, and regulation of the State or a local government, and the qualification, service, appointment, and guarantee of status, etc. of a teacher of a private school shall be treated as a teacher of a public school. On the other hand, the special Act on the Improvement of Teachers' Status enacted for the purpose of improving teachers' status and enhancing their status status guarantee by improving honorable treatment and strengthening their status guarantee shall be allowed to file a request for re-deliberation with the Teachers Disciplinary Review Committee established in the Ministry of Education like a national or public school teacher, and the decision of the Disciplinary Review Committee shall be bound by a disposition authority to file an administrative lawsuit against the decision of the Review Committee on disciplinary action against a teacher.

[1] Articles 9, 10(2) and (3) of the Special Act on the Improvement of Teachers' Status; Articles 1 and 12 of the Administrative Litigation Act / [2] Article 10(3) of the Special Act on the Improvement of Teachers' Status; Articles 1, 12 of the Administrative Litigation Act; Articles 11 and 27 of the Constitution

[1] [2] Supreme Court Decision 93Nu23046 delivered on June 13, 1995 (Gong1995Ha, 2405) / [1] Supreme Court Decision 92Nu13707 delivered on February 12, 1993 (Gong193Sang, 105)

The Korea Educational Institute of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (Attorney above-Law)

Teachers Disciplinary Review Committee of the Ministry of Education

Intervenor joining the Defendant

Seoul High Court Decision 94Gu25867 delivered on June 28, 1995

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

In accordance with Article 9 of the Special Act on the Improvement of Teachers' Status (hereinafter referred to as the "Special Act"), a teacher of a private school subject to disciplinary action may file a request for review with the Ministry of Education Disciplinary Committee (hereinafter referred to as the "Review Committee"), and Article 10 (2) of the Special Act provides that "the decision of the Review Committee shall bind the person in charge of the disposition," and Article 10 (3) of the same Act provides that "the decision of the Review Committee may be brought under the conditions as prescribed by the Administrative Litigation Act, in regard to the decision of the Review Committee, only the teacher in charge of the request for review may file an administrative litigation against the Review Committee, and the school juristic person which is the person in charge of the disciplinary action shall not be deemed to have filed an administrative litigation against the person in charge of the disciplinary action, and the person in charge of the right to request review shall not be deemed to have been appointed or dismissed under Article 12 of the Administrative Litigation Act, and the relationship between the teacher in the private school and the school juristic person shall not be deemed to have been established by the person in charge of the State or public law.

The judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as the theory of lawsuit.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Yong-hun (Presiding Justice)