Whether the provisions of Article 11-2 of the Public Educational Officials Act that grant additional points to those who have graduated from teachers' colleges and colleges of education, who apply for the recruitment examination for teachers in the areas determined by the appointing authority, within the scope of 10% of the full score of the first examination (negative)

Article 11-2 of the Public Educational Officials Act established by the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development to grant additional points to those who have graduated from teachers' colleges and colleges of education within the area determined by the appointment authority within the scope of 10% of the full score of the first examination. The provisions of Article 11-2 of the Public Educational Officials Act are reasonable grounds for discrimination between those who have graduated from local colleges of education and those who have graduated from local colleges of education and those who have graduated from colleges of education and those who have not completed colleges of education. By granting additional points to only those who have graduated from colleges of education, thereby falling under the restriction of the right to enter public office under Article 25 of the Constitution, the right to freedom of occupation under Article 15 of the Constitution, and the right to pursue happiness under Article 10 of the Constitution, but the legitimacy and means of legislative purpose are appropriate, and it does not violate the minimum principles of infringement and the principle of balance

Article 11-2 of the Public Educational Officials Act, Articles 10, 11, 15, 25, 31(1), and 37(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea

Plaintiff (Attorney Kim Sung-hoon, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

The superintendent of the Office of Education

November 1, 2006

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The defendant's decision of 2006 against the plaintiff on January 27, 2006 also revoked the decision of failure to pass the competitive examination for selecting candidates for appointment of public middle school teachers in Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff graduated from the department of study of the prestigious Women’s University, acquired the secondary level secondary school’s regular teacher qualification, and applied for the Defendant’s 2006 examination for appointment of public middle school teachers (hereinafter “instant appointment examination”) in the course of the prestigative examination for appointment of public middle school teachers (hereinafter “instant examination”).

B. On November 3, 2005, the Defendant announced the Seoul Special Metropolitan City public secondary school teachers (including special, health and private school teachers) on the appointment test of this case. The Defendant announced the outline for the implementation of the competitive examination for the appointment of public secondary school teachers (including special, health and private school teachers). The details are as follows.

(1) Screening method

The appointment examination of this case is divided into the first examination and the second examination, and the second examination is divided into the second examination, and the second examination is divided into the two subjects of education (or special education) and the second examination, and the second examination consisting of the essay examination, the interview, the evaluation of the ability to perform the class, etc., which is composed of the first examination and the second examination.

(2) Additional points

Local added points: A person who is a graduate of a college located in Seoul Special Metropolitan City and has no teacher's career, a graduate of a high school located in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, or a graduate of a high school located in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, or a graduate of a high school located in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, with no teacher's career, and two additional points for a graduate of February 2006 and a graduate of a college located in Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

(3) Selection of successful applicants

Successful examinees in the first examination shall be determined in the order of high score calculated by adding up the first written examination points, the results of the university (or the results converted from the first examination), and additional points within 1.3 times the number of persons recruited by subjects among those who score at least 40% of the number of persons recruited by subjects in the first written examination (education and majors), respectively.

A successful applicant of the second examination shall be determined in the order of the highest score in the sum of the first written examination results, additional points, college records (or the first written examination results), and the results of the second written examination results.

C. On the ground that the Plaintiff’s score falls short of 0.9 points in 152.93 (the Plaintiff’s score is 152.03) from among the successful applicants in the course of the appointment examination of this case, the Defendant rendered a disposition of failure (hereinafter “instant disposition”) by excluding the Plaintiff at the time of announcement of the second successful applicants in the appointment examination of this case on January 27, 2006.

D. The Plaintiff’s results could have passed both the first and second tests when calculating the test results for the applicants for the appointment examination of this case except the regional virtual acid points.

[Grounds for Recognition] Gap 1-4 Evidence

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The clause of the area of this case is an unconstitutional provision that infringes on the constitutional equality rights, the right to public service, the right to freedom of choice of occupation, the right to pursue happiness, etc. by discriminating between the person from the school of the school of the person who was at the school of the person who was at the school of the person who was at the school of the other region and the person from the school of the school of the person who was at the school of the person who was at the school of the person who was at the school of the other area,

B. Relevant statutes

The entries in the attached Table-related statutes are as follows.

(c) Markets:

(1) Whether the principle of equality is violated

(A) According to Article 11(1) of the Public Educational Officials Act, new appointment of teachers is made through an open screening process, and according to Article 11-2 of the same Act, in an open screening process conducted under Article 11(1) of the same Act, the appointment authority may grant additional points to those falling under [Attachment 2] within the scope of 10/100 of the full score of the primary examination. According to [Attachment 2] subparagraph 2 of [Attachment 2], those who have graduated from colleges of education (including college education) and comprehensive teachers’ training colleges and apply in areas determined by the appointment authority are subject to additional points.

(B) Article 11-2 [Attachment 2] subparagraph 2 of the Public Educational Officials Act (hereinafter “instant provision”) discriminates against those who have completed a college of education located in an area other than those who are determined by the appointing authority at the additional point, and discriminates against those who have completed a college of education located in an area designated by the appointing authority at the additional point (Article 11-2 (Attachment 2). However, the Plaintiff is not a teacher, and the Plaintiff is not a teacher, and this part is not determined).

(C) The developments leading up to the establishment of a new provision of the instant area’s store

On October 8, 1990, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality as to Article 11(1) of the former Public Educational Officials Act that requires the appointment of a national or public teacher from a national or public college of education to take an examination of appointment according to the decision of unconstitutionality as to Article 11(1) of the former Public Educational Officials Act. As a result, in the past, excellent human resources entered a local school instead of a prestigious group in Seoul, have contributed to improving the quality of local education by selecting a local middle school teacher as a local middle school in lieu of a prestigious group in Seoul, a new examination of appointment of a new teacher of education within the scope of 10% by adding a new provision of Article 12(1) of the Public Educational Officials Act to a person who newly established a new education college within the scope of 15th of 10th of 204.

(D) The principle of equality under Article 11(1) of the Constitution does not mean absolute equality that denies all discriminatory treatments, and thus, only if discrimination is made without reasonable grounds, it is against the principle of equality. Accordingly, this paper examines whether the instant regional acraination clause is a provision that discriminates without reasonable grounds.

(1) Discrimination of those who have completed a local college of education and those who have completed a local college of education.

Article 31(1) of the Constitution provides that "All citizens shall have the right to receive equal education according to their abilities." Accordingly, all citizens shall have the right to receive equal quality education without any discrimination according to their region, and the State shall have the duty to prepare a system necessary for education of equal quality. The provisions of the regional virtual store in this case provide that excellent human resources may be appointed as teachers of local secondary schools by entering local criminal groups, thereby contributing to the development of local education. Ultimately, by protecting and fostering local criminal groups, there are reasonable grounds for discrimination as a system to ensure that all citizens under Article 31(1) of the Constitution shall have the right to receive equal education according to their abilities.

(2) Discrimination of those who have completed a college of education and those who have non-colleges of education.

In the teachers' training, the curriculum of the college of education is more specialized than the curriculum of the non-colleges of education, and it is necessary to attract excellent human resources in the college of education, which aims to establish the unique purpose of the teachers' training, and the additional points in attracting excellent human resources are very efficient systems in reality, and there was discrimination in the regional sanitation system in the case of the colleges of education and non-colleges of education since the entrance into the university. Accordingly, there was a difference between those who support the colleges of education and those who support the colleges of education and those who support the non-colleges of education in terms of the desire for the teachers' training and the expectation for their entry into the colleges.

C. Therefore, the clause of the instant area does not violate the principle of equality.

(2) Whether the right to public office, the right to freedom to choose occupation, and the right to pursue happiness are violated

(A) public office rights, freedom of choice of occupation, and restriction on the right to pursue happiness;

Article 25 of the Constitution provides that "All citizens shall have the right to hold a public office under the conditions as prescribed by Act," thereby guaranteeing the right to hold a public office with respect to all citizens, including election public officials, and the right to hold a public office with respect to all national agencies and local governments, and public secondary school teachers have the status of public educational officials. The provisions of the area of this case provide additional points to those who were enrolled in the college of education, thereby limiting the opportunity for other applicants, including the plaintiff in competition, to take a public office. In fact, since the plaintiff failed the appointment examination of this case due to the lack of regional origin, it constitutes a restriction on the right to hold a public office, and it also constitutes the restriction on the freedom to choose a job and the right to pursue happiness as prescribed in Article 10 of the Constitution.

(B) Whether the principle of excessive prohibition is violated

In the Constitution, even if the right to participate in public affairs, the right to choose occupation, and the right to pursue happiness are guaranteed, it may be restricted by law for national security, maintenance of public order, or public welfare, unless it infringes on the essential contents of the right or interest. However, even if it is restricted by law, the legislation that limits fundamental rights shall meet the legitimacy of the legislative purpose, the appropriateness of the means for achieving the purpose, the minimum degree of damage caused by the legislation, and the balance between

(1) The legitimacy of legislative purpose

As seen above, Article 11 (1) of the former Public Educational Officials Act was ruled unconstitutional on October 8, 1990 by the Constitutional Court of Korea, and its legislative purpose is legitimate as it was newly established to prevent the existing excellent human resources from entering a local middle school instead of a prestigiousious group in Seoul and making a lot of contributions to improve the quality of local education, and to select local middle school teachers as local middle school teachers, and to make an appointment examination only after entering a large city such as Seoul, or entering a department of a general university or college, or preparing an appointment examination after completing only a course of study, rather than complying with the course of study within a college of education.

(2) Appropriateness of means

Although there are various methods to achieve the above legislative purpose, since the region of this case is a very efficient system in reality, it can be seen that the means has the appropriateness. This is because the causal relationship between the legislative purpose and legislative means is clear and the effect of the law that can achieve the legislative purpose can be seen as certain.

3. Minimum degree of infringement

Although the area of this case is subject to partial restrictions due to the provisions of non-colleges of education such as the Plaintiff, the right to attend public office, the right to choose occupation, the right to pursue happiness, and the right to pursue happiness, it is difficult to view the area of this case as an excessive additional points in light of the national technical qualification additional points (1 to 2 points), multiple major additional points (2 points), and secondary major additional points (1 points), etc. It is difficult to view the area of this case as an excessive additional points to the extent that it is practically impossible for those who have acquired the qualification certificate of teachers from non-colleges of education to enter school positions. Considering the fact that it is not easy for the area of this case to take less restrictive legislative measures than the area of this case, it cannot be deemed that the area of this case violates the minimum principle of infringement by excessively restricting the scope of the right to attend public office, the right to choose occupation, the right to pursue happiness, and the right to pursue happiness.

(4) A balance of legal interests.

Considering the importance of the value of preventing any situation that is not desirable to take the examination preparation only in the course of study at an employment examination institute, etc. rather than faithful to the course of study in the course of study, etc., rather than to protect the quality of local education through the improvement of the quality of local education through the fostering of local colleges of education to be achieved pursuant to the provision of the employment of the instant region, and the prevention of termination of the course of study to be completed only by the general university, and the importance of promoting the equal quality of education between the regions without any difference, even if such restriction is limited to certain extent, this cannot be deemed to violate the principle of balance of legal interests.

Therefore, the provisions of the area of this case do not violate the principle of excessive prohibition.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the defendant's disposition of this case is legitimate based on the constitutional law, and the plaintiff's claim seeking its revocation is not accepted as it is without merit.

Judges Park Jong-chul (Presiding Judge)