1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

The Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology is a corporation established pursuant to the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology Act to comprehensively perform the research support for the fostering of gifted with theories and application ability in the fields of science and technology necessary for the development of national industries, the mid- and long-term research and development on national policies, the basic application research for the building of national science and technology, other research institutes, industry, etc., and disseminate the results

The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) was appointed as an assistant professor of the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology on September 1, 2007 and continued to serve after being reappointed.

On March 31, 2015, the intervenor filed a request for an examination of appointment of a Young-gu position, and the plaintiff notified the intervenor of the rejection of appointment of a Young-gu position on June 22, 2015 after the deliberation by the teachers' personnel committee.

On July 21, 2015, the intervenor filed a petition review with the Defendant seeking the revocation of the recommendation to dismiss the employment of the aged on the job, and the Defendant accepted the Intervenor’s assertion on November 25, 2015 and rendered a decision to revoke it.

On August 1, 2016, the Plaintiff conducted an examination of appointment for a new post on the Intervenor, and notified the Intervenor of his/her non-recommended appointment for a post on August 1, 2016.

On August 29, 2016, an intervenor filed a petition review with the Defendant seeking the revocation of recommendation to dismiss a person who has not been appointed as a person in his/her old-age position. On June 7, 2017, the Defendant accepted the Intervenor’s argument and rendered a decision to revoke it.

(2) Article 10(3) of the Special Act on the Improvement of Teachers’ Status of Defense for Safety (hereinafter “this case’s legal provision”) (hereinafter “instant decision”) provides that the Defendant’s appeal review decision shall be based on the following facts: (a) there is no dispute; (b) Gap’s written evidence Nos. 1 through 9; and (c) the purport of the entire pleadings is legitimate; and (c) whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate; and (d) the Defendant’s appeal review decision shall be subject to the provision of Article 2 of the Private School Act.