1. Each of the plaintiffs' claims is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is a local government that operates the Ethic Art Group, and the plaintiffs shall be reappointed every two years as the chief member of the Ethic Art Group.

B. On December 24, 2013, the E market publicly announced a regular rating plan with the following content (hereinafter “instant regular rating”).

정기평정 결과 반영 2013년 정기평정점수는 2014년 말 시행예정인 종합평정에 반영 ⇒ 재위촉 및 경고, 1호봉 승급 등 2013년 시행 평정 종류 구분 2013년 정기 평정 출연단원 점수 비출연단원 및 실기평정 비대상 비고 시행여부 사유 계 100(5) 100(5) 경력 평정 미시행 2014년 1회 평정 5점 5점 근무 평정 시행 생략 15점 15점 상시 평정 시행 생략 80점 실기 평정 시행 단원 연습시간 부족으로 2014년 2월 시행 80점 생략 가점 평정 시행 생략 (5점) (5점) 2013년 실기 평정 일정 실기평정 일정 구분 일정 장소 비고 교향악단 2014. 2. 11.(화) ~

2. 12.(Water) From February 18, 2014 to February 18, 2014 to the choirs.

2.(Water Danceers) On February 25, 2014;

C. The Plaintiffs refused the instant regular rating and received zero points in the performance rating.

On August 2014, the E market publicly announced the 2014 E-Si Art Group comprehensive evaluation of the following contents:

The method of evaluating the outline of a comprehensive evaluation: Calculation (the regular evaluation score of this case in 2014) based on the average of the regular evaluation scores during the period of appointment (the regular evaluation scores of this case in 2014) ± reflection of the results of evaluation ± 1 re-commissioning a person who has basic score as a result of evaluation - Standing members with at least 90 standing at least 70 and less than non-standing 65 standing members: a warning; a warning; a non-standing person who has failed to obtain the basic score of the chief vice-class (the dismissal of a non-standing person twice a year) 2. A re-contract for a general member

E. On December 24, 2014, according to the public notice of the performance of the foregoing comprehensive rating, the Defendant, on an average of the instant regular rating scores and the regular rating scores in 2014 (hereinafter “instant comprehensive rating”), conducted a comprehensive rating (hereinafter “instant comprehensive rating”), and the Plaintiffs thereafter.