In a case where a person who is appointed as a master teacher for an elementary or secondary school is qualified as another teacher under Article 21 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act while in office, but has not been appointed through an appointment procedure in accordance with subjects and duties corresponding thereto, whether it constitutes a case where there is a change of qualification, which is a requirement for re-determination of a salary grade under Article 9(1)1 of the Public Officials Remuneration Regulations, and a new career experience arises (negative)

Article 9(1)1, [Attachment 22], Article 21(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Article 2(2) [Attachment 1], Article 2(3) [Attachment 2], Article 11-3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Decree on the Qualification of Teachers, Article 21(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Private School Act, Article 3 of the Rules on the Competitive Examination for Selection of Candidates for Public Educational Officials, Article 12(1) of the Public Educational Officials Act, Article 53-2(1) of the Private School Act

Plaintiff

Teachers' Appeals Review Committee (Law Firm, Attorneys Park Gam-young et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

School Foundation ○ Private Teaching Institute (Attorney D Jeong-sung, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 2012Nu32897 decided July 11, 2013

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 9(1) of the Public Officials Remuneration Regulations provides that “Where a public official falls under any of the following subparagraphs while in office, his/her salary grade shall be re-defined.” Article 9(1) provides that “where a new career arises (in cases of public educational officials, including where there is a change in qualifications, academic background, or name (limited to universities or junior colleges) of his/her salary grade)” as one of the grounds for re-Definition of his/her salary grade.

In addition, by clarifying the matters delegated by the Public Officials Remuneration Regulations and the criteria for the duties related to the remuneration of public officials, such as the determination of the salary grade, the “Guidelines for the Remuneration of Public Officials, etc.” enacted for the purpose of achieving the accuracy and uniformity of duties (amended by the Ministry of Public Administration and Security Ordinance No. 163 of Jun. 30, 2008 and amended by the Ministry of Public Administration and Security Rule No. 377 of Sept. 21, 201) and the “the manual of the 2008 Public Officials Remuneration Business, etc.” prepared the work guidelines for the relevant educational administrative agencies and their employees in the Ministry of Education (Ministry of Education) and the “the manual of the Ministry of Education, etc. for the remuneration of public educational officials in 208” means “the case of acquiring the superior qualification for the appointed subject, which is the ground for the re-determination of the salary grade”

Meanwhile, Article 21(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act divides the qualifications of teachers into regular teachers (class I and II), assistant teachers, specialized counselors (class I and II), librarians (class I and II), vocational teachers, health teachers (class I and II), and nutrition teachers (class I and II). Article 2 [Attachment I] and [Attachment II] of the Enforcement Rule of the Teachers Qualification Examination Decree of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act strictly distinguish the subjects in charge of indicating the qualifications of regular teachers and assistant teachers in secondary schools and the qualifications of regular teachers. The appointment of teachers is conducted by classifying them into the categories of qualifications, the classification of career experience for which the appointment is scheduled, and the appointment is scheduled. In order for a teacher to obtain the qualifications of a new teacher in the relevant secondary school under the provisions of Article 2 of the Private School Act, he/she shall be appointed differently from the appointment of a new teacher in the relevant secondary school, Article 21(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Private School Act, Article 3 of the Regulations on the Selection of Candidates for Public Educational Officials, etc.

In full view of the language and purport of the Public Educational Officials Remuneration Regulations, which include “where there is a change in qualifications” as to public educational officials in the “reasons to add new career experience,” which is the requirement for re-Definition of the salary grade, the duty guidelines such as public officials’ remuneration concerning the meaning of change in qualifications, the classification of practical teachers and other teachers’ qualifications as well as the procedure for appointing teachers by classifying qualifications and subjects by duties of teachers, etc., and the text and purport of the relevant regulations, even if a person who is appointed as a practical skill teacher in an secondary school or a private school where the provisions on remuneration are applicable mutatis mutandis acquires the qualification of another teacher as prescribed by Article 21 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act while he/she is in office, if he/she is not appointed through the procedures for appointment according to the corresponding subject and duties, it cannot be said that there has occurred a change in qualifications, which is the requirement for re-Definition of salary grade for public educational officials as prescribed by Article 9(1)1 of the Public Educational Officials Regulations.

2. (1) On February 16, 1980, the lower court recognized the following facts: (3) The Plaintiff, who was appointed as a practical teacher for a night regular commercial course at ○○ High School established and operated by the Defendant joining the Defendant, a school foundation, as a school foundation on November 3, 1984, obtained the qualification of a secondary school class 2 teacher (commercial) during his/her employment; (4) the Defendant’s articles of incorporation provide that the remuneration regulations applicable to public educational officials shall apply mutatis mutandis to the remuneration of the affiliated teachers; and (2) the qualification changes refer to the case of acquiring the higher qualification for the appointed subject; (3) so, the lower court determined to the effect that the change of qualification can only be permitted if it is deemed that there is no problem in the operation of the subject within the scope of the appointment subject, and thus, determined that the Plaintiff’s qualification as a senior school class 2 teacher, which is an indication of qualification certificate for a secondary school class 2 teacher, is included in the “commercial qualification for a secondary school class 2 teacher.”

3. However, in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, even if the Plaintiff, who was appointed as a practical teacher in charge of making an additional entry by acquiring the qualification as a practical teacher, obtained the qualification as a secondary school teacher (commercial) in his/her office, insofar as he/she is not appointed as a teacher falling under the qualifications and qualification mark of the secondary school, it cannot be deemed that there is a change of qualification as a reason for re-fixing the salary class with only the similarity between the additional subject and the commercial subject.

Nevertheless, the lower court recognized that the Plaintiff, a practical skill teacher, obtained the qualification for teacher in a subject similar to the actual skill teacher’s qualification mark, thereby causing the ground for re-determination of the salary class, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the requirements for re-determination of the salary class for the teacher in a private school and the classification of the qualifications and subjects of the teacher. The ground of appeal assigning this error has merit.

4. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Shin (Presiding Justice)