정직처분 무효확인 등 청구
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. Since the Plaintiff was appointed as an assistant professor and a full-time lecturer at the humanities University on September 1, 1983, the Plaintiff was employed through the associate professor and the associate professor on October 1, 1996 and served as a professor at the above university until now.
B. On December 2010, the Plaintiff published a thesis for the title “E” (hereinafter referred to as “E”) in Chapter D No. 53 published by CSchool Association (hereinafter referred to as “C”) and published the thesis for the title “H” (hereinafter referred to as “Class 2 thesis”) of the same content in fact in G published by F around February 2012, and did not indicate the winning fact or obtain permission from CSchool Association, which is the editor or publisher of the first thesis.
(hereinafter referred to as “first act”). (c)
On October 25, 2012, the Plaintiff provided the same content and form of study as the class hours, which is a subject of study, to the Plaintiff, who is a major of study. However, the Plaintiff did not include the grounds for the disciplinary action.
At the time, the title “I” (hereinafter referred to as “Class 1”), “K” (hereinafter referred to as “Class 2”), and “L” (hereinafter referred to as “Class 3”) were assigned a task to publish in the real name of “M” and “N” in the title of “I”.
(hereinafter referred to as "second act") d.
On September 3, 2013, the Committee on the Promotion of Research Ethics (hereinafter referred to as the “Promotion Committee”) proposed that the Defendant take a heavy disciplinary measure against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff’s first act constitutes a research misconduct due to double publication of the research paper.
E. On December 27, 2012, the National Human Rights Commission organized an emergency response committee and submitted a written application to the headquarters of the university, and filed a petition with the National Human Rights Commission on supra. On December 27, 2013, the Plaintiff’s second act is based on students’ conscience and ideology that takes lessons.