1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal, including the costs of supplementary participation, are all borne by the Plaintiff.

The reasoning of the court of the first instance’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: “The plaintiff shall be deemed to have terminated as a matter of course, i.e., the period of contract specified in the third employment contract,” and “the plaintiff shall have signed the said employment contract without any evidence to acknowledge it,” in addition to adding “(the plaintiff shall not have any objection to the expiration of the contract period specified in the third employment contract, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it)” to “the grounds of the first instance judgment. Therefore, this shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

(2) The court below's decision that rejected the plaintiff's claim is justifiable, since the plaintiff's claim is not significantly different from the already asserted contents in the court of first instance. Thus, the court of first instance that rejected the plaintiff's claim even if the plaintiff's newly presented evidence was examined in the court of first instance. Thus, the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal disputing it is without merit, and it is so dismissed as per Disposition.