logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.11.09 2016구합13533
조례무효확인
Text

1. The proceedings of the Selection B, C, D, E, F, G, and H shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the appointed parties I, J, K, L, M, N,O, P, Q.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The status of the parties (appointed parties; hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiffs”) and the designated parties listed in the attached Table 1 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Plaintiffs”) are parents of the students of X elementary, middle and high schools located in the Y-gun, Y-gun, Y-gun, Y-gun, Y-gun, Y-gun, or residents of the Y-gun.

B. On September 26, 2011, the Office of Education prior to the establishment of a plan for the fostering of middle and high schools in the former, South, west-gun District District Office of Education established a consolidation plan (hereinafter “instant consolidation plan”) with those of X high schools in which the Z high schools located in the area of the new, south, west-gun (hereinafter “Z/X area”) were abolished in 2014 in accordance with the “plan for the fostering of the regional core high schools in an agricultural and fishing village area” for the purpose of strengthening the educational competitiveness and fostering of appropriate middle and high schools (hereinafter “Z/X area”).

C. 1) Since November 201, the Nannam-do Office of Education conducted a survey on the plan for the consolidation of this case for the parents of Z/X and local residents, following a briefing session for fostering hub schools, promotion council, etc. As a result, on March 5, 2012, the Nannam-do Office of Education obtained the consent of 98.6% in the Z area and X area, and 61.7% in the X area. However, on March 22, 2012, the Nan middle and high school management committee rejected the plan for the consolidation of this case (six members, three members, three dissenting members), on June 23, 2012, the Nannam-do Office of Education conducted a survey on the plan for the consolidation of schools (3rd members, 2000, 200 X-X-2, X-2, 36% in the list of schools (36% in total, 37% in total, 45% in total, 37% in total, 36% in schools).

However, the establishment of a central school;

arrow