1. Case history

A. The Plaintiff is a professor in the computer department of B University established and operated by the school foundation C, and the victim D and F are students of the department to which they belong.

B. On April 10, 2015, the Defendant joining the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff on the grounds that the Plaintiff committed sexual harassment and sexual harassment on several occasions against female students with the relevant department including the following acts, which constitutes grounds for disciplinary action under each subparagraph of Article 61(1) of the Private School Act.

(1) The victim D-related disciplinary reasons ① when D visited the Plaintiff’s laboratory together with his relative to obtain a letter of recommendation for volunteer activities, the victim said D-related disciplinary reasons that the Plaintiff would make a letter of recommendation if kiscing the kis.

(Disciplinary Reason No. 1-2). (2) In the course of class, questions were made, as shown in D, and were given guidance.

(1-3 Disciplinary Reason No. 1-3). (3) If D finds the Plaintiff’s laboratory, he made an ambiguous speech, such as “matha-gu and fritha-gu”, “matha-patha-patha-patha-patha-patha-patha-patha-patha-patha-pathatha-pathath,” and “abre-con

(2) The victim F-related Disciplinary Reason No. 1-4 No. F. F. (Disciplinary Reason No. F. (Disciplinary Reason No. 1-4) gave guidance to F in the following school hours, making it unnecessary to sit F. and made physical contacts.

(2) The act of sprinking her face in hand, with her hand, with her hand, with her hand, was committed. (3-1 Disciplinary Reason No. 3-1)

(3) If there is a provision with F, the sale should not be punished.

(3-3 Disciplinary Reason No. 4. F. F. F. F. F. k's kissed in Department MT, and caused mental shock twice.

(3-4 Disciplinary Reason). (5) Without any choice to kisck the Plaintiff’s kisck, F would have to do so on her own kisc from the shipper F.

(Disciplinary Reason No. 3-5)

On May 7, 2015, the plaintiff appealed against disciplinary action and filed a petition review against the defendant.