The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

judgment of the first instance.

The reason why our court's explanation about this case is the same as that of the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this is cited in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(1) The Plaintiff’s mother, the Plaintiff’s mother, did not make an illegal solicitation in relation to the appointment of the Plaintiff. However, it is insufficient to reverse the fact-finding and decision of the first instance court that the instant appointment contract constitutes an act of anti-social order as stipulated in Article 103 of the Civil Act even if the Plaintiff’s former testimony, including testimony of witness F, and there is no other counter-proof. Rather, according to the witness F’s testimony, following the date when the appointment of the Plaintiff became final and conclusive, the Plaintiff demanded D, who was the Defendant president, to pay the school development fund to G via F. Although the annual income that the Plaintiff was able to obtain as an employee of the Seoul Women’s High School, did not reach KRW 20 million, G paid KRW 20,000 as required by D with the school development fund, and F, who was not the accounting treasurer of the school development fund, may be recognized as having not paid the school development fund directly to the president and not account as the school development fund. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s appeal is dismissed and the Plaintiff’s appeal is dismissed.