Seoul

A person shall be appointed.

Seoul

3. ■■■

Seoul

A person shall be appointed.

Seoul

Creditors' Law Firm ○○○

○○, ○○, ○○

Seoul

Representative ○○○○

Attorney ○-○, et al.

Law Firm ○○, Attorneys ○○, ○○, and ○○○

(a) Extraordinaryly determine that the obligees are in the position of a professor in the business management department of ○○ University operated by the obligor;

B. The obligor shall not interfere with the obligees' performance of duties as a professor of ○ University by doing each act listed in the separate sheet.

C. The debtor shall pay each of 7,00,000 won to the obligees on the 20th day of each month after the date of service of the original copy of this decision.

2. The obligees' remaining claims are dismissed.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the debtor;

19, 826, 180원, 채권자 ▲▲▲에게 12, 548, 990원, 채권자 ■■■에게 12, 954, 200원, 채권

자 ◆◆◆에게 10, 004, 754원을 임시로 각 지급하라 .

According to the overall purport of the record and examination of this case, the following facts are substantiated:

가. 채무자는 ○○대학교를 설립하여 운영하고 있는 법인이고, 채권자들은 ○○대학교의 정교수들로서, 채권자 ●●●은 2010. 3. 경부터 ○○대학교 경영전문대학원 경영컨설팅학과의 학과장, 채권자 ▲▲▲, ■■■, ◆◆◆는 ○○대학교 경영학과의 교수로 재직하여 왔다 .

B. Around the end of March 2010, 2010, ○○○○○○○○○○○ was appointed as the head of the department of management consulting, and around the end of March 2010, the creditor discovered that part of the research expenses for the curriculum development of the Science Promotion Foundation and WCU (World Clas Univ, global level of research-oriented universities) were paid without any evidence. To confirm, around March 31, 2010, the creditor sent an e-mail requesting a interview with A, who was retired after being employed as a female researcher of the management consulting department in 2009. However, the creditor’s request for the interview was considered to be due to the fact that the creditor’s sexual harassment against himself/herself was the case of sexual harassment by the professor of the ▽▽▽△△△○○. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 220190, Oct. 2010>

4.2. The above e-mail sent e-mail to the creditor ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○

C. The obligee sent a e-mail that asked A to specifically verify the content of the e-mail sent by A while making an inquiry about the payment of research expenses in 2009, and as to this, A revealed that the obligee was unjustly executed part of the research expenses by the professor △△△△△△, the obligee paid part of the research expenses to B by the graduate student C, who uses the same laboratory as B, instead of the research activities of B, according to the direction of the professor △△△△△△△, and the graduate student D was unfairly treated by the professor who is the director of the ▽▽▽△△△△△△△△△△△, and thus, a graduate school student D was subject to unfair treatment from B, who is the head of the business group, who is the head of the business group. The e-mail sent the e-mail with the content.

D. Accordingly, the creditor ○○○○○○, through several interviews with D around April 2010, D, and D was registered as a researcher for a task to be studied by the professor of the No. report of No. report of No. report of this case, and was transferred research expenses to the said assistant, and then delivered them to the said assistant. 7 The No. report of this case was made by the professor of the No. report of this case. 7 The No. report of this case paid part of the research expenses received by D to B under the direction of the No. report of No. report of this case, and confirmed that B was unfairly treated by the professor of the △△△△△△△△△ on the ground that he had a conflict with B regarding the relationship with the professor of the No. report of this case, and received a copy of the passbook from D.

E. In addition, around April 2010, ○○○○○○○○○○, a creditor had a interview with C. Around April 2010, after registering as a researcher of a task that he/she studies No. 7 No. Professor, he/she received research funds as a passbook in the name of C, and delivered them to the professor who is in the name of C, and confirmed the fact that the teaching staff is in a bad relationship with B. The student E who is in the doctoral process, and E was registered as a researcher of a task that he/she is in the research conducted by the teaching staff, and E was registered as a researcher of a task that he/she was in the research by the teaching staff, and then was transferred research funds as a passbook in the name of E, and then received a copy of the passbook in the name

(f) The creditor ○○○○○○○○○, a creditor, prepared a copy by organizing the contents of dialogue with C, D, and E, and also reviewed the documents related to the project cost for the year 2009 of “the consulting graduate school and consulting R &D center establishment project” by receiving them from the consulting business entity, and examined the data related to the research cost.

G. On May 6, 2010, ○○ University’s president, as the president of the department of management consulting at the management graduate school, submitted a written request for disciplinary action against the professor of the △△△△○ University, along with relevant data, such as a copy of the relevant ○ University’s book and passbook, consulting R&D and D center establishment projects in 2009.

H. Accordingly, on May 10, 2010, the president of ○○ University: (a) had the auditor of ○○ University investigate the unjust execution of research funds by △△△△△△△△△△△△△, etc. Accordingly, the auditor confirmed the details of the payment of research funds by the consulting business entity; (b) conducted an interview with △△△△△△△ professors, creditors, and students involved; and (c) during the process, the professor of No. 2010, Jun. 10, 2010 submitted a letter of resignation, but the president of ○○ University did not accept the said letter of resignation.

자. 채권자 ◆◆◆는 채권자 ●●●으로부터 채권자 ●●●이 추가로 작성한 비망록을 교부받아 2010. 6. 28. ○○대학교 총장에게 이를 제출하였는데, 그 비망록에는 C가 경영대학의 ♤♤♤ 교수와 BBA 교수에게도 연구비를 보냈다는 내용이 포함되어 있었다 .

(j) Meanwhile, on July 8, 2010, 16 full-time professors, working at ○ University Management University and at the graduate school of business management, are title hereinafter referred to as “the President and the President’s thickness.” As a result, some professors, who are not qualified and authorized, personally investigate the back of the faculty, thereby causing unnecessary burdens on the headquarters of the relevant department, and resulting in infringement of human rights and defamation of the professors and students. As such, if such conflict and division continue, ○ University Management University will reduce the number of professors, and thus, ○ University Management University will have resolved the current situation in a reasonable direction. The “The content was prepared, and then distributed it to the President, the debtor, the president, and the professor of ○ University.”

카. 채권자 ●●●은 위와 같이 ▽▽▽ 교수에 대한 사직서가 반려되고 ▽▽▽ 교수를 옹호하는 서면이 배포되자, 채무자가 ▽▽▽ 교수를 징계할 의지가 없다고 보고 , 2010. 7. 27. 채권자 ▲▲▲, ■■■, ◆◆◆와 함께 ' 경영대 교수의 국고 연구비 횡령 , 제자와의 부적절한 관계 및 연구원 성희롱 사건의 전말 ' 이라는 제목으로 ▽▽▽ 교수의 국고 연구비 횡령 등의 내용을 비실명으로 기재한 내용의 서면을 첨부하여 ' 최근 경영대 사태와 관련 ○○ 공동체 여러분들게 드리는 글 ' 이라는 제목의 성명서를 작성한 다음, 이를 교수들에게 배포하는 한편, ⑦⑦⑦ 교수 및 ♤♤♤ 교수를 검찰에 고발하였 타. 이에 △△△ 방송국 기자들이 취재를 하자, 채권자 ●●●과 채권자 ■■■은 위 취재에 응하는 한편, 채권자 ●●●은 D에게도 권유하여 취재에 응하도록 하였다 .

(m) On July 29, 2010, 2010, the △△△ auditor submitted an audit report to the debtor on the audit report, and the said audit report was “9,271,040 won out of the curriculum development 1, 2, and WCU research expenses of the Research Foundation curriculum development 1, 2, and WCU research expenses, as research assistant allowances, but was verified through the investigation that it was inappropriate, and the relevant party did not deny the inappropriate relationship with the female student. In addition to the preparation of the audit report on the contents, “7, the professor did not use research and project performance for private purposes, and the inappropriate research expenses were not returned, and the professor has not been able to develop the teaching staff with such excellent capacity.”

하. 채무자의 교원인사심의위원회는 2010. 8. 9. 위원회를 개최하여 채권자들에 대한 징계요청의 건을 심의하였고, ○○대학교 총장은 2010. 8. 13. 채권자들에 대한 징계를 제청하였으며, 이에 채무자는 2010. 8. 24. 이사회의 심의 · 의결을 거쳐 교원징계위원회에 징계를 요구한 다음, 그 징계의결에 기하여 2010. 11. 10. 아래와 같은 사유로 채권자 ●●●에 대하여 파면처분을, 채권자 ▲▲▲, ■■■, ◆◆◆에 대하여 각 해임처분을 하였다 .

[1] Violation of the duty to maintain dignity, violation of the duty to obey, and violation of the duty to obey, and violation of the duty to obey

(1) Creditors shall continue to conduct the audit business of a university with respect to a petition case in a legitimate manner, and 2010.

6. On several occasions including the 29.29. The president conspireds with the president of the management department and the president of the specialized graduate school, etc. to refrain from doing solemnly in accordance with the provisions of this situation. However, on July 27, 2010, he/she accused of criminal charges against the professor and Professor, who is audit and inspection, and provided relevant information to the press (△△△△△△△△), thereby hindering the school’s audit and inspection, as well as harming the school’s reputation. (ii) In addition, in collusion, he/she collected information on July 27, 2010 in a large number of occasions in which the facts were not clearly verified, thereby infringing on the duty to maintain dignity as a teacher and confidentiality of the university, and caused such series of acts to inflict direct or indirect harm on the reputation of the school and property of the university, and (iii) submitted the same fact that the student violated his/her duty to maintain his/her reputation and property as a professor of the No. 3270, May 6, 2010 and the No.

B) Violation of the duty to protect and guide students

The obligees threatened students of the faculty to be subject to disciplinary action or judicial processing when demanding the submission of copies of the bankbooks and not cooperating with them on the ground that they are self-investigation of the embezzlement case. The creditors forced the students to interview with the press (△△△△△△△) so that students’ act of fear and insult that are difficult to read and act of providing guidance and violation of human rights, thereby violating the duty to protect and guide students as teachers, and violated other persons’ rights due to abuse of authority (hereinafter “Disciplinary Reason 2”).

C) Violation of the duty of prohibition of collective action

Creditors conspired to commit a collective act in a collective and systematic manner as seen above, thereby violating the obligation of prohibiting collective act (hereinafter referred to as the "Disciplinary Reason of this case").

2) Individual grounds for disciplinary action against the creditor Do governor Do governor Do Governor on the ground that the creditor violated his duty to maintain dignity.

① On May 24, 2010, at the time of an interview with the △△△△ Auditor audit, the creditor deemed that, if the result of the audit conducted by the university, a strong measure to the extent that the person himself thought was not taken, the party concerned would be accused of the prosecution. At present, six professors of the business administration department signed the accusation prepared in cooperation with legal experts and signed the signature professor would be added, thereby interfering with audit and inspection affairs by unfairly pressureing the audit. In addition, at the time of the first request for audit, the second demand for audit was interfered with audit by intentionally omitting some of the materials (as of May 6, 2010) and demanding the extension of the audit scope according to his/her own needs (hereinafter “instant disciplinary cause”).

② The obligee breached the duty to maintain dignity as a teacher by doing abusive and assault (scambling and scambling) on the two occasions on April 20, 209 and November 17, 2009. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 20613, Apr. 20, 2009; Presidential Decree No. 20658, Apr. 2, 2009>

(3) A creditor shall be △△△△△△△△△△, the head of the project group, without the approval and legitimate audit authority.

In 209, the consulting graduate school of the small enterprise office and the R&D center establishment project were requested to the administrative team of the agency for business expenses in order to disregard the internal administrative processing system by individually investigating and keeping for at least three days (hereinafter referred to as the "Disciplinary Reason of this case").

B) Violation of the Regulations on the Responsibilities Hours of Former Professors

채권자 ●●●은 학기 중임에도 EQUIS ( 유럽경영인증 ) 을 위한 해외출장 ( 2010. 6. 6 . ~ 2010. 6. 18. ) 을 가서 출장목적이 종료된 후에도 1주일간의 개인여행을 하여 전임교수 책임강의시간에 관한 규정 { 제2조 ( 책임강의시간수 ) ① 전임교수는 학기 중 매주 5일 근무하여야 하며 } 을 위반하였다 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 ⑦ 징계사유 ' 라고 한다 ) . 3 ) 채권자 ■■■에 대한 개별적 징계사유가 ) 품위유지의무 위반

채권자 ■■■은 2009. 12. 29. 및 2010. 1. 2. 경영학과 교수 전원에게 보낸 이메일을 통해 특정 교수와 직원에 대하여 명예를 훼손하고 학과 운영에 대한 왜곡되고 부정적인 시각을 갖게 하여 학과 내 분란을 유발함으로써 교원으로서의 품위유지의무를 위반하였다 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 ⑧ 징계사유 ' 라고 한다 ) .

B) Violation of good faith and duty of obeying

채권자 ■■■은 2010. 6. 23. 강의평가가 좋은 교원 중심으로 MBA 강사를 배정하라는 경영전문대학원 부원장 ※※※ 교수의 지시를 위반하여 교원 당 연 1회씩 강의가 돌아가는 형태로 나눠먹기식의 강사를 배정하여 행정절차를 무시하고 MBA 강의의 질을 떨어뜨림으로써 성실의무와 복종의무를 위반하였다 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 ⑨ 징계사유 ' 라고 한다 ) .

4 ) 채권자 ◆◆◆에 대한 개별적 징계사유가 ) 품위유지의무 위반1① 채권자 ◆◆◆는 2010. 8. 경 소속 대학원의 타 교수에게 “ 이사장님과 총장님께 드리는 글을 작성한 16인을 그냥 두지 않겠다. ” 고 하고 재단감사와 총장 등 경영진에게 폭언하는 발언을 하여 품위유지의무를 위반하였다 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 ① 징계사유 ' 라고 한다 ) .

② 채권자 ◆◆◆는 2009. 8. 5. 경영학과 교수들에게 “ 언제부터 행정력 등 능력이 인정되고, 교수들이 공감한 보직인사가 이루어졌습니까. ”, “ ▷▷▷ 교수에게도 본인의 용단을 촉구합니다. ” 라는 이메일을 보내 경영대학원장의 명예를 훼손하고 부당하게 사퇴를 압박하여 품위유지의무를 위반하였다 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 ① 징계사유 ' 라고 한다 ) .

B) Violation of Article 3 of the Regulations on Overseas Travel

교원이 해외여행을 하기 위해서는 반드시 총장의 허가를 받아야 함에도, 채권자 ◆◆◆는 2010. 8. 경 총장의 허가 없이 해외여행을 하여 직장을 무단으로 이탈하여 직장이탈금지의무와 ○○대학교 국외여행에 관한 규정 제3조를 위반하였다 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 ② 징계사유 ' 라고 한다 ) .

(o) The provisions of the Private School Act and the State Public Officials Act related to this case are as follows: (1) Article 55 of the Private School Act (Service)

The provisions concerning teachers of national and public schools shall apply mutatis mutandis to the service of private school teachers.

Article 61 (Causes and Kinds of Disciplinary Action)

(1) If a teacher of a private school falls under any of the following subparagraphs, the person who is authorized to appoint and dismiss the teacher concerned shall request a resolution on disciplinary action, and take a disciplinary action according to the result of a resolution on disciplinary action

1. Where he performs an act contrary to the teacher's principal portion in violation of this Act and other education-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

2. When he violates or neglects his duties;

3. When he commits an act detrimental to the dignity of a teacher regardless of whether he is on or off duty.

(2) Disciplinary actions shall be removal, dismissal, suspension from office, reduction of salary, and reprimand. (2) All public officials under Article 56 (Faithful Duties) of the State Public Officials Act shall observe Acts and subordinate statutes and perform their duties in good faith.

Article 57 (Duty to Comply with)

A public official shall obey any official order of his/her superior in performing his/her duties.

Article 58 (Prohibition of Deserting Office)

(1) No public official shall leave his/her place of work, except in extenuating circumstances.

Article 66 (Prohibition of Collective Action)

(1) No public official shall engage in any collective activity for any labor campaign, or activities, other than public services: Provided, That those who are actually engaged in labor shall be excluded herefrom.

2. Determination on the application portion, such as the preservation of professor status

A. Determination as to the existence of the grounds for disciplinary action (1) of this case

In this case, the above facts and the following circumstances proved by the records of this case:

즉 ① 채권자 ●●●은 경영전문대학원 경영컨설팅학과의 학과장으로 부임한 후, ⑦7 ▽ 교수 및 연구원 A 등 5명에게 국책연구비 중 일부가 근거 자료 없이 집행된 것을 발견하고, 이를 A에게 확인하는 과정에서, ▽▽▽ 교수의 연구비 횡령, 제자 B와의 불륜 관계, A에 대한 성희롱 등을 알게 되었고, 이를 다시 C, D, E를 통하여 사실관계를 구체적으로 확인한 다음, 관련 자료를 첨부하여 ○○대학교 총장에게 ▽▽▽ 교수 등에 대한 징계를 요청하였던 것인데, 이러한 행위가 경영컨설팅학과에 새로 부임한 학과장으로서의 정당한 업무 수행의 범위에 해당하지 아니한다거나, 채권자 ●●●이 충분한 확인조치를 취하지 아니한 채 허위의 사실을 총장에게 보고하였다고 보기는 어려운 점, ② 이후 ○○대학교 총장의 지시로 ☆☆☆ 감사가 위 사건에 대한 조사를 하였으나, ☆☆☆ 감사가 작성한 조사보고서의 내용이 미흡한 것으로 보이는데다가, ○○대학교 경영대학과 경영전문대학원에 재직하고 있는 정교수 16명이 ▽▽▽ 교수 등을 옹호하고, 채권자 ●●●, ◆◆◆를 비난하는 내용의 서면을 작성, 배포하는 등의 상황에 이르게 되자, 채권자들은 채무자가 위 사건을 정당하게 처리할 의사가 없다고 보고 , ' 최근 경영대 사태와 관련 ○○ 공동체 여러분들에게 드리는 글 ' 이라는 제목의 성명서를 작성, 배포하고, ▽▽▽ 교수 등을 검찰에 고발하는 한편, 채권자 ●●●, ■■■은 언론사의 취재에 응한 것인데, 위와 같이 학교의 내부사실을 외부에 공표하게 된 경위나 그 공표내용과 진위, 목적, 방법 등에 비추어 볼 때, 이러한 채권자들의 행위에 어떤 잘못이 있다고 보기는 어려운 점, ③ ☆☆☆ 감사가 작성한 조사보고서에 의하더라도 ▽▽▽ 교수가 국책연구비를 횡령한 것은 사실로 밝혀진 점, ④ ○○대학교 총장이 경영학부 학장 및 경영전문대학원 원장 등을 통하여 채권자들에게 위 사건을 외부에 알리지 말 것을 지시하였다고 볼 자료가 없을 뿐만 아니라, 그러한 지시를 하였다고 하더라도 이러한 지시가 채무자들에 대한 직무범위 내에 속하는 사항을 대상으로 한 정당한 직무상의 명령이라고 보기도 어렵고, 또한 채권자들이 검찰에 고발장을 제출하고 언론의 취지에 응하는 행위가 해교행위에 해당함으로써 관련 법령에 정한 징계사유를 충족한다고 볼 소명자료도 없는 점 등에 비추어 보면, 채권자들의 행위가 사립학교법 및 국가공무원법에서 정한 품위유지의무, 복종의무 등을 위반한 행위에 해당되어 징계사유가 된다고 보기는 어렵고, 달리 이를 소명할 자료가 없다 . ( 2 ) 이 사건 ② 징계사유에 관한 판단

먼저, 채권자 ▲▲▲, ■■ ◆◆◆에 대하여 보건대, 위 채권자들이 소속 학부 학생들과 면담을 하거나, 관련 학생들에게 언론기관의 인터뷰에 응하도록 하였다고 볼 소명자료가 없다 .

Next, according to the records of this case, in the course of confirming the facts against the creditor ○ Do○○○○○○, the creditor ○○○○○, D, and E, the fact that the embezzlement of research funds was an erroneous act that may cause a cause for the disciplinary action, etc., was substantiated, but it is difficult to deem that the creditor ○○○○○○○ was a threat to the above student or an act of infringement of human rights, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise. (3) Determination on the grounds of the instant disciplinary action

Article 66 (1) of the State Public Officials Act, which applies mutatis mutandis under Article 55 of the Private School Act, does not mean any collective act performed by public officials for any work other than public duties, but rather means any collective act that affects the public interest by comprehensively taking into account the legislative purport of Article 21 (1) of the Constitution and the legislative purport of the State Public Officials Act that guarantees the freedom of speech, press, assembly and association, the duty of good faith under the State Public Officials Act, and the duty of good faith under the State Public Officials Act and the duty of good faith. Thus, the above act by the creditors becomes an act of impairing ○ University.

In addition, it is difficult to see that the act does not constitute an act that may affect the duty of care for the purpose of going against the public interest, and there is no other evidence to prove the same (4)

The data submitted by the debtor alone is difficult to deem that the creditor interfered with audit and inspection by unfairly pressureing the △△△△△△△△, and there is no other supporting data.

또한, 이 사건 기록에 의하면, 채권자 ●●●이 2010. 5. 6. 최초 감사 요구 시 제출되지 않은 비망록 일부를 채권자 ◆◆◆를 통하여 2010. 6. 28. 추가로 제출한 사실은 소명되나, 이러한 사정만으로 감사업무를 방해하였다고 할 수도 없다 . ( 5 ) 이 사건 ⑤ 징계사유에 관한 판단

According to the evidence submitted by the debtor, the creditor Do governor Do governor decided on April 20, 2009, and Do governor Do governor Do governor on November 17, 2009, and it is proved that Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor was Do governor Do governor Do governor and Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor was Do governor Do governor Do governor. Thus, the above act by the creditor Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor Do

(6) Determination on the grounds for the instant disciplinary action

An obligee cannot be deemed to have breached any official duty on the ground that the 2009 project cost-related documents file was kept more than three days in 2009 of the Small and Medium Business Administration’s business consulting graduate school and consulting R&D center establishment project (the obligor is merely indicating that the obligor neglected the internal administrative processing system, but does not indicate any provision corresponding to the grounds for disciplinary action).

(7) Determination on the grounds of the instant disciplinary action

According to Article 2(1) of the Regulations on the Time of the Full-time Teaching Staff Act, the full-time teaching faculty shall work five days a week during a semester, and the number of hours per semester of the full-time teaching faculty shall be as follows. According to the documents submitted by the debtor, Dou Dou-gu, a creditor of June 6, 2010.

In light of the fact that an overseas business trip for the purpose of certification of European Management has been staying more than four days even after the completion of the business for the purpose of certification of European Management, and the fact that he returned to the Republic of Korea on the 18th day of the same month is proved, but the creditor Dou-gu Doudong-gu had obtained prior approval from the principal of the school from June 6, 2010 to the end of June 18 of the same month, and that Dou-gu Doudong-gu had all the lectures that he did not have been during the business trip period in accordance with the reinforcement plan submitted in advance after returning to the Republic of Korea, it is difficult to readily conclude that the above facts alone are in violation of the above provision, and no other evidence exists to prove

이 사건 기록에 의하면, 채권자 ■■■ 이 주말 MBA 과정인 SEMBA 강의를 배정받았다가 갑자기 ◁◁◁ 교수와 강의를 나누어 하는 것으로 결정되자, 이에 항의하면서 2009. 12. 29. 과 2010. 1. 2. 경영학과 교수 전원에게 이메일을 보내면서 경영대학원장인 ▷▷▷ 교수를 비난하는 내용을 포함시킨 사실은 소명되나, 사립대학 교원이라도 헌법상 보장된 대학의 자치 및 학문의 자유에 기하여 대학의 운영, 특히 강의 배정에 관하여는 일정한 범위 내에서 발언권을 갖는다는 점을 부인하기 어려운 만큼 교수가 강의 배정의 문제에 관하여 의견을 제시할 수 있다고 보이는 점, 위 이메일은 외부로 유포된 것이 아니라 경영대학교 교수들에게만 전송된 점, 그 내용 중에 비록 그 표현이 거칠고 저속한 부분이 있다고 하더라도 실제 의미는 이미 결정된 강의 배정을 일정한 절차를 거치지 아니하고 일방적으로 취소하여서는 안 된다는 것이고, 이로써 대외적으로 학교 또는 교원의 명예가 실추된다고 보기는 어려운 점 등에 비추어 보면 , 채권자 ■■■의 위와 같은 행위가 교원으로서의 품위손상행위에 해당한다고 볼 수는 없고, 달리 이를 소명할 자료가 없다 .

(9) Determination on the grounds for the instant disciplinary action

살피건대, 채권자 ■■■ 이 경영전문대학원 부원장 ※※※ 교수의 지시를 위반하여 강사를 임의로 배정하였다는 점을 소명할 자료가 없다 . ( 10 ) 이 사건 ① 징계사유에 관한 판단

이 사건 기록에 의하면, 채권자 ◆◆◆가 2010. 8. 9. 경 동료교수이자 선배인 미▣▣ 교수와 대화를 하던 중에 " 이사장님과 총장님께 드리는 글 ' 을 작성한 16인을 그냥 두지 않겠다. " 고 하면서 감사 ☆☆☆, ○○대학교 총장 등을 비난하는 말을 한 사실은 소명되나, 이는 채권자 ◆◆◆가 ▣▣▣ 교수와 화장실, 채권자 ◆◆◆의 교수실에서 개인적인 대화를 나누던 중에 흥분 상태에서 나온 발언인 점, 그 내용 중에 비록

그 표현이 다소 거칠고 저속한 부분이 있다고 하더라도 사적인 친분이 있는 동료 교수와 사이에 이루어진 개인적인 방담에 지나지 아니하는 것으로 보이는 점 등에 비추어 보면, 채권자 ◆◆◆의 위와 같은 행위가 교원으로서의 품위손상행위에 해당한다고 볼 수는 없다고 할 것이고, 달리 이를 소명할 자료가 없다 . ( 11 ) 이 사건 ① 징계사유에 관한 판단

살피건대, 이 사건 기록에 의하면, 채권자 ◆◆◆가 2009. 8. 5. 경영학과 교수들에게 이메일을 보내면서 " 언제부터 행정력 등 능력이 인정되고 교수들이 공감한 보직 인사가 이루어졌습니까 ? ", " ▷ ▷▷ 교수에게도 본인의 용단을 촉구합니다. " 는 내용을 포함시킨 사실은 소명되나, 위 이메일의 전체 내용, 위 이메일을 보내게 된 경위, 위 이메일을 보낸 후의 사정 등에 비추어 보면, 채권자 ◆◆◆의 위와 같은 행위가 교원으로서의 품위손상행위에 해당한다고 볼 수는 없고, 달리 이를 소명할 자료가 없다 . ( 12 ) 이 사건 ② 징계사유에 관한 판단

○○대학교 국외여행에 관한 규정 제3조에 의하면, 교원이 국외여행을 하고자 할 때에는 국외여행신청서와 이를 증빙할 수 있는 서류를 첨부하여 학과장을 경유, 여행개시일로부터 10일 이전에 학장에게 제출, 총장의 허가를 받아야 한다고 규정하고 있는바, 채무자가 제출한 자료에 의하면, 채권자 ◆◆◆가 총장의 허가를 받지 아니한 채 2010. 8. 경 국외여행을 한 사실이 소명되므로, 채권자 ◆◆◆의 행위는 위 규정을 위반한 것으로서 징계사유에 해당한다 .

(13) Sub-decisions

따라서 채권자 ▲▲▲, ■■■ 에게는 징계사유가 존재하지 않는다고 할 것이고 , 채권자 ●●●에게는 이 사건 ⑤ 징계사유만이, 채권자 ◆◆◆에게는 이 사건 ② 징계사유만이 존재한다고 할 것이다 .

나. 채권자 ●●● 및 채권자 ◆◆◆에 대한 징계양정의 당부에 관한 판단

In a case where a disciplinary measure is taken against a disciplinary measure against a disciplinary measure who is a teacher under the Private School Act, it is left at the discretion of the person having authority to take the disciplinary measure. However, even if the exercise of the authority to take the disciplinary measure is entrusted to the discretion of the person having authority to take the disciplinary measure, if it violates the principle of public interest that should exercise the authority to take the disciplinary measure for public interest purposes, or if it violates the principle of equality by choosing an excessive disciplinary measure which is contrary to the degree of flight that would normally be taken as a cause of disciplinary measure, or by selecting an excessive disciplinary measure which is contrary to the standards of general application for the same degree of flight without reasonable grounds, it shall be deemed that

그런데, 앞서 본 바와 같이 채권자 ●●●, ◆◆◆에 대하여는 대부분의 징계사유가 소명되지 아니하고, 단지 채권자 ●●●에게는 이 사건 ⑤ 징계사유만이, 채권자 ◆◆◆에게는 이 사건 ② 징계사유만이 존재하는 것으로 소명되는 점, 그 소명되는 징계사유도 그러한 행위를 하게 된 경위, 그 내용 등에 비추어 비위의 정도가 그다지 중한 것으로 보이지 아니하는 점, 채권자 ●●●, ◆◆◆가 이전에 징계를 받은 적이 없이 교수로서 본분을 지키며 연구와 교육을 통해 학교와 사회에 기여해 온 점 등 기록에 나타난 제반 사정에 비추어 보면, 채권자 ●●●을 파면에 처하고, 채권자 ◆◆◆를 해임에 처한 징계처분은 징계사유에 비하여 그 징계양정이 균형을 잃은 과중한 처분에 해당하여 비례의 원칙에 위반된다고 할 것이므로, 채권자 ●●●, ◆◆◆에 대한 징계처분은 재량권을 일탈하거나 남용한 것으로 무효라고 볼 여지가 충분하다 .

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, it is sufficient to see that disciplinary action against creditors is all null and void, so the obligees' right to preserve the status of regular professors until the judgment on the merits is rendered, and the obligees' right to preserve against the debtor for the prohibition of each act listed in the separate list shall be proved, and in light of all the circumstances shown in the records, such as the obligor's attitude toward the creditors and the degree of infringement on the obligees' rights, the necessity of preserving the order shall also be proved by

3. Determination on the part on the application for wage payment

As long as disciplinary action against the obligees is deemed null and void, the obligor needs to pay to the obligees an appropriate amount of money necessary to maintain a life worthy of human dignity until the judgment on the merits is rendered, and in light of various circumstances shown in the records, such as average wages at the time of the obligees' removal or dismissal and the level of maintaining their livelihood with their family members, it is reasonable to determine that the obligor shall pay the obligees 7,00,000 won temporarily to the obligees.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the obligees' motion of this case is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, subject to the offer of security, and the remaining motion is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

o a board o

OO