1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 1, 1994, the Plaintiff was appointed as a professor of the above school after being appointed as an English education and full-time lecturer at the college of education at B University, a national university on October 1, 2006, as an assistant professor and a associate professor on April 1, 2010, respectively.

B. On January 29, 2014, the Defendant requested a disciplinary resolution against the Plaintiff to the B University Disciplinary Committee, and on February 25, 2014, on the ground that the Plaintiff committed the following misconduct, and on the grounds that the Plaintiff violated Articles 56 (Duty of Fidelity) and 58 (Duty of Prohibition of Deserting Office) of the State Public Officials Act, the Defendant issued a disposition of suspension from office for two months pursuant to Article 78 (1) 1 of the State Public Officials Act against the Plaintiff.

【Cheating by Plaintiff】

1. On the lectures assigned to the second semester of the 2013 term, the Plaintiff spreaded the false content of the mobile phone text message “A person in charge of the instant text message has been removed from the annual leave of absence of a professor in charge, making changes to his/her application for the class, thereby leaving his/her lecture.” (hereinafter “instant text message”).

2. On February 2013, the Plaintiff, who fails to attend classes, conducted the classes in charge of the second semester (underlying English law and interpretation, English language language 200, English language language 200, English language language 100, English language language 100) through C, as “degree of attendance.” However, according to the report on the state of attendance (in English education) in the second semester of 2013, the term of compulsory class during the second semester of 2013 is 6 weeks (excluding sick period, middle-end examination period), but the actual duration of class is only 2 weeks.

3. The Plaintiff was absent from work without permission, such as the Plaintiff’s duty to attend the work place on a daily basis (including a vacation) during a semester, and the Plaintiff was absent from work without permission during a vacation.

C. On March 11, 2014, the Plaintiff, who is dissatisfied with the two-month disciplinary action of suspension from office, filed an appeal review with the Appeal Commission for Teachers for the revocation thereof, and the said Appeal Commission for the revocation thereof.