beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
Facts of recognition
From March 1, 1997, the Plaintiff was appointed as a B and a full-time lecturer at the Sungsung University operated by the Defendant as an associate professor through an associate professor. From March 1, 2013, the Plaintiff was reappointed every two years from March 1, 2015 to February 29, 2016.
On March 4, 2016, the head of the Defendant’s Ministry of Education notified the Plaintiff of the expiration of the term of appointment, and the Defendant’s president notified the Plaintiff of his refusal of reappointment on April 2, 2016.
(hereinafter referred to as “the first rejection disposition”). On March 31, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an appeal against the first rejection disposition against the Plaintiff on March 31, 2016. On May 18, 2016, the Appeal Commission for Teachers revoked the first rejection disposition on the grounds that: (a) the Defendant violated the notification period under Article 53-2(4) and (6) of the Private School Act; (b) the Plaintiff delegated the president’s authority to re-appoint solely with the resolution of the board of directors without the grounds for the articles of incorporation in violation of Article 53-2(2) of the Private School Act; and (c) the Plaintiff did not give the Plaintiff an opportunity to present his/her opinion in violation of Article 53-2(7) of the Private School Act; and (d) the Plaintiff’s refusal disposition on the second rejection disposition on the grounds that the Plaintiff
(hereinafter “First Appeal Review and Decision”. On June 8, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the procedure for review of re-appointing the Plaintiff will proceed again by correcting procedural defects in (i), (ii) and (3) and notified the Plaintiff of the refusal to re-appointing the Plaintiff on August 30, 2016.
In addition to the foregoing paragraph, the Defendant indicated “less the standard points for the research area and service area” as the grounds for rejection of reappointment, and specifically notified the grounds and reasons for calculating each standard point, and corrected the defect in the above paragraph 5.
(2) On September 21, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an appeal against the second rejection disposition.