2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

The court's explanation on this part is the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Party’s argument

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) The absence of grounds for disciplinary action (A) destroyed account books related to the lease of school facilities (hereinafter “grounds for disciplinary action”) was mostly leased through a unit contract, and the one-time lending was not more than three times a year.

The plaintiff has preserved all the annual contract in accordance with the ordinary procedure, and only destroyed some documents related to the one-time loan in accordance with the business practice.

The contents of documents destroyed by the plaintiff can be confirmed through the general document receipt ledger and the plaintiff's deposit receipt records.

(B) The Plaintiff was unaware of the existence of a separate account that is not the school accounting account account (hereinafter “foreign account”) with respect to aiding and abetting the embezzlement of school accounting expenses following the opening and execution of the foreign account (hereinafter “the grounds for disciplinary action”) and did not keep part of the documents related to the lease of school facilities.

The Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have aided and abetted the operation of a bank account and the embezzlement of school accounting expenses only on the ground that it substituted for the simple deposit of a bank requested by E.

(C) As to the violation of the provisions of the school construction contract and the improper payment of the price (hereinafter “grounds for disciplinary action”), the Plaintiff considered that the principal’s permission was granted for the selection of the construction company and the payment of the construction cost, etc., and only carried out the work according to the direction of the head of the administrative office, and did not gain any individual

(D) As to the forgery of a private document (hereinafter “the grounds for disciplinary action”), the Plaintiff prepared a contract and documents related to the completion of construction with H’s implied consent, and thus, does not constitute forgery of the private document.

(E) Individual private housing charges embezzlement of school accounting expenses (hereinafter “Disciplinary ground 5”).