beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: ① the “C Center” of the second, fourth, and tenth of the judgment of the court of first instance; ② the third, fourth, and fifth of the third, the “Act on the Development of Workplace Skills of Workers” of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Development of Workplace Skills of Workers (amended by Act No. 13902, Jan. 27, 2016; hereinafter “Vocational Skills Development Act”); ③ the “Act on the Development of Workplace Skills of Workers of the former Act (amended by Act No. 13902, Jan. 27, 2016); ③ the “Act on the Development of Workplace Skills of Workers of the former Act on the Development of Workplace Skills of Workers (amended by Act No. 13902, Jan. 27, 2016); and ④ the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Development of Workplace Skills of Workers of the former Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27393, Jul. 26, 2016) is added to the following:
2. Additional determination
A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Human Resources Development Service of Korea made the “presumed truth-finding ratio” using voluntary data produced by the automatic earthquake program, and that the Defendant modified the evidence No. 4 and No. 11 by changing the “presumed truth-finding ratio” to the “presumed truth-finding ratio.”
In full view of the overall purport of the arguments, Gap evidence Nos. 27 and Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 11, the Human Resources Development Service of Korea analyzed voluntary data created by the automatic advanced program, and prepared the first document indicating the actual learning rate of the training except that it is judged that the trainee did not take a course with respect to the records consistent with the errors of the automatic advanced program, and it was determined that the trainee did not take a course, and it was calculated by the actual learning rate of the training in this case, and the defendant arranged the said first document.