logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2012.09.20 2011구합32324
호봉정정처분취소기각결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including costs incurred by participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 3, 1984, the Plaintiff was newly appointed as a night-time commercial assistant teacher at Chigh School operated by Defendant Intervenor’s Intervenor, and was employed as a middle-class regular teacher at D University Education Graduate School on February 22, 1996. On May 7, 2009, the Plaintiff acquired the qualification as a secondary-class regular teacher (commercial information).

B. On November 15, 2010, the Plaintiff sought re-Definition and promotion of salary class on the premise of a change in the qualification of a teacher upon obtaining a higher qualification, and applied for the correction of salary class to the Defendant’s Intervenor. On February 25, 2011, the Defendant Intervenor rejected an application for the correction of salary class to the effect that, around February 25, 2011, Chigh School was converted from a vocational high school to a general high school, and the current number of teachers for each item in the situation where the commercial subject is reduced or abolished cannot be appointed beyond the prescribed number of teachers (hereinafter “instant refusal”).

C. On March 15, 2011, the Plaintiff appealed, and filed a request for review of a teacher’s petition seeking to revoke the Defendant’s refusal to correct the salary class. The Defendant reviewed the procedure for appointment of a teacher’s qualification and, if deemed that the school juristic person does not interfere with the operation of the curriculum within the scope of the quota of each subject, should reflect changes in the qualification of the teacher. However, the Defendant dismissed the above request for review of a teacher’s petition on the ground that it is recognized that the Plaintiff was unable to implement the procedure for appointment of a teacher’s qualification to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff’s supplementary participant was unable to undergo the procedure for appointment of a teacher’s qualification due to the fact that the Chigh School is converted into a general class in 2011, and the commercial subject is not operated any longer because it was converted into a personal department high school in 2011.

【Ground of recognition” has no dispute, and there is no evidence No. 1.

arrow