1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the costs incurred by participation.

Details of the disposition

On March 1, 2007, the Plaintiff was appointed as a full-time lecturer (Non-Retirement Age Professor, project professor in exclusive charge of the Non-Retirement Age Professor) operated by the Intervenor on March 1, 2007, and entered into an agreement on March 1, 2009 as a full-time lecturer (Non-Retirement Age Professor), two consecutive terms of appointment on March 1, 2009 and March 1, 201, and entered into an agreement as an assistant professor with the Intervenor on March 1, 2013 with the term of the contract of the Intervenor as six years.

(hereinafter “instant contract for reappointment.” On October 22, 2018, prior to the expiration of the term of the instant contract for reappointment, the Plaintiff filed an application for reappointment with the president of C University.

On December 28, 2018, an intervenor rendered a decision to refuse the renewal of the term of the contract to the Plaintiff on the grounds that the Plaintiff falls short of the performance of the thesis, every two years, on the grounds that the term of the contract falls short of at least one part (100%) of domestic and foreign professional academic area, which is the standard for review of the reappointment of the Intervenor, under Article 8 of the Regulations on Non-Retirementing Teachers (hereinafter referred to as the “Regulations”).

(hereinafter “instant rejection disposition”). The specific grounds for the disposition are as follows.

The Plaintiff’s appeal is filed against the Defendant on January 15, 2019, against the Intervenor’s instant disposition of refusal on the ground that: (a) first (2013-2014) second (2015-2016) second (2017-2016) third (2017-2018) 174-100% of 100% of 100% of 186-2 1320% of 186.2.1320% of 130% of 186.2.30% of 130% of the 1300% of the 1300% of the 1320% of the 2019-2019. However, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s claim on March 27, 2019.

(1) The Plaintiff’s relevant provisions are as follows: (a) the Plaintiff’s relevant provisions applicable to the Plaintiff’s reappointment are as follows: (b) there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition; (c) the entry of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7 through 10, 15, and 32; and (d) the purport of the entire pleadings as to the validity of the instant decision; and (d) the Plaintiff’s assertion