A. The parties concerned and the defendant are stock companies running banking business prescribed by the Banking Act. The plaintiff is a person who entered the defendant bank around March 1980 and worked as the branch office of the defendant C branch (hereinafter referred to as the "branch of this case") from December 18, 2013 to December 18, 2016, and was subject to a disposition of imposition of KRW 1,385,200,000 for dismissal (hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case") and indemnity on August 25, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of imposition of indemnity of this case"), and when it is referred to as the "disposition of this case", the plaintiff was subject to the disposition of imposition of indemnity of this case.

(A) evidence of heading 1, 2.b.

On May 12, 2017, the Defendant: (a) determined that the Plaintiff, who applied for voluntary retirement during the first half of 2017, dealt with the unsound credit due to the fact that he/she would work as the loan hub at the time of his/her work as the head of the instant branch; and (b) investigated the Plaintiff on the grounds of disciplinary action after taking a waiting measure against the Plaintiff; and (c) on August 10, 2017, the Defendant held a deliberative committee of the Prosecutor’s Office to which the Defendant belongs to the Defendant, to determine the grounds of disciplinary action; and (d) requested the Defendant’s Personnel Council to deliberate and decide on the instant disciplinary action.

On August 24, 2017, the Personnel Council of Defendant Bank discussed the grounds for disciplinary action against the Plaintiff, and sought the Plaintiff’s explanation, and then taken the instant disciplinary action on August 25, 2017.

(Evidence 22, 24, 25). (c)

The summary of the grounds for the instant disciplinary action stated in the notice of dismissal and reimbursement (Evidence A(2) that the Defendant notified the Plaintiff on August 25, 2017 is as follows.

(hereinafter) The following grounds for disciplinary action are specified as “the instant grounds for disciplinary action” according to the sequence, and, in general, the term “each of the instant grounds for disciplinary action” is referred to as “each of the instant grounds for disciplinary action”). 1. From March 12, 2014 to March 8, 2016, four loan hubs [D, E, F, and G] during the period from March 12, 2014 to March 8, 2016, the representative (fyp president) has been changed several times, and the entity (fyp president) has moved its address to the same place of business after loan handling.