1. On March 22, 2017, the Defendant filed a claim for revocation of a disposition rejecting the reappointment between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor.

1. Details and details of the decision;

A. The Plaintiff is a school foundation that establishes and operates the D University located in Ssung City (hereinafter “instant school”).

On March 1, 2005, the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) was a foreign full-time teacher of the instant school E (hereinafter referred to as the “Supplementary Department”) and continued to be reappointed on a one-year basis for the expiration of the term of the contract after being newly appointed as a foreign full-time teacher for a period of one year, and entered into an appointment contract with the term of two months as of February 28, 2017.

B. On October 31, 2016, the Plaintiff provided guidance on the expiration of the term of appointment and the application for reappointment to the intervenors, and the Intervenor submitted an application for reappointment to the Plaintiff on November 1, 2016.

C. On December 6, 2016, the Plaintiff: (a) held a teachers’ personnel committee to decide to refuse the appointment of an intervenor classified as subordinate to the results of the re-employment by reflecting the academic opinions on the reduction of the number of academic subjects due to the structural reform of the university; and (b) the lack of securing the number of teaching subjects due to the structural reform of the course of study; and (c) on December 14, 2016, the Plaintiff notified the intervenors of the opportunity to submit their opinions if they raise an objection thereto.

On December 22, 2016, an intervenor submitted a written objection to the instant school. On December 27, 2016, the Plaintiff held a teachers’ personnel committee to provide an intervenor with an opportunity to state his/her opinion. On December 27, 2016, on December 29, 2016, the Intervenor again held a teachers’ personnel committee to decide to refuse to re-appoint the Intervenor.

E. On December 30, 2016, the Plaintiff reduces the number of academic subjects following the university structural reform to the intervenors on December 30, 2016;

2. Not securing the completion of teaching subjects due to the reorganization of the curriculum of a department;

3. Notification that the exclusion from reappointment has become final and conclusive on the grounds of the sub-examination result of reappointment.

(1) In the course of deliberation of re-election, the reasons for exclusion have not been specifically notified to the intervenors, and the statement of opinion has been made.