1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

2. The plaintiff's assertion and the plaintiff

3. The grounds for the lower court’s amendment to each of the above parts are as follows: (a) the relevant part of the reasoning of the first instance judgment (from No. 4 to No. 10, and from No. 7 to No. 9) is the same as that of the relevant part of the reasoning of the first instance judgment, with the exception of the amendment to some of the foregoing parts as follows; and (b) thus, this Court shall accept it in accordance with

No. 2 of the judgment of the first instance court, “E is not designated as a person subject to assistant principal qualification training” was amended to “E is notified of denying recommendation of a person subject to assistant principal qualification training.”

Part 8, Part 3, Part 1-12, Part 9, Part 12, Part 14, 16, Part 4, and Part 2 and Part 8 below are amended to “D”.

4. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. As to the defense that the instant disposition does not have the nature of disposition, the Defendant did not have the right to recommend the Plaintiff as an assistant principal who did not have the right to recommend the Plaintiff as an assistant principal and did not have the nature of disposition as an object of revocation lawsuit.

The issue of whether a certain act of an administrative agency can be the subject of an appeal cannot be determined abstractly and generally. In a specific case, an administrative disposition is an enforcement of law with regard to specific facts conducted by an administrative agency as the subject of public authority, which directly affects the rights and obligations of the people. The decision shall be made individually taking into account the content and purport of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, the subject, content, form and procedure of the act, the actual relation between the act and the disadvantage suffered by interested parties, such as the other party, and the principle of administration by the rule of law, the attitude of the administrative agency

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2018Du38932, Jul. 26, 2018). The evidence mentioned earlier and the evidence set forth in subparagraphs 4 through 7, respectively.