beta
(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.04.27 2016구합70871

취소결정취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 1, 2010, the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as “ Intervenor”) was appointed as C University Social Welfare and an associate professor of non-Retirement Age (Appointment period: February 29, 2016) and served as a social welfare department from February 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014.

① Although the Intervenor, as the principal of a department, has complied with the relevant statutes and school regulations, and has fulfilled his/her duty in good faith, he/she opened a specific driving school and an assistant nurse’s license without prior consultation or approval with the relevant university authority, and has recruited or aided a specialized instructor of a private teaching institute who is not a school but a part-time lecturer commissioned by a university.

This is a violation of Article 35 of the school regulations, Article 20 of the Enforcement Rule of the school regulations, Article 3 of the school regulations.

② The Intervenor recommended “D” as a part-time lecturer of the same department from the first semester of 2012 to the second semester of 2014, in which he/she had been employed as the principal of the department, so that he/she may be commissioned as a part-time lecturer of five subjects, such as “at least” established as a social welfare and regular subject during the same period, and then, the class is conducted at a private teaching institute which is not a university or college, and even at the university’s time table, he/she provided that a part-time lecturer in a university or college was operated as if he/she was given a class

This is a violation of Article 35 of the school regulations, Article 20 of the Enforcement Rule of the school regulations, Article 3 of the school regulations.

③ In addition, since the said lectures were made by a professional instructor of a private teaching institute other than D, even though it is aware that the “tuition and attendance book” indicated as D was false, it was granted credits to 241 students by submitting it to the school with the knowledge that it was false, and separately requested the relevant instructor to have him/her recognize it as a job experience during the job experience period.

This is.