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.

1. Details of the petition review and decision;

A. On April 30, 2010, the Plaintiff was newly appointed as a full-time lecturer at trade department in the Korea Trade University at C University operated by the Intervenor’s private teaching institute and served as an associate professor on September 1, 2016, and was concurrently employed as the head of C University’s consumer cooperative secretariat from August 6, 2012 to September 30, 2015.

B. On September 8, 2017, the Plaintiff was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for conviction for committing a crime listed in attached Table 1.

(D) The Plaintiff appealed against the Plaintiff on October 31, 2018, and the appellate court reversed the judgment of the first instance on the ground of unfair sentencing and sentenced the Plaintiff to a suspended sentence of eight months in imprisonment with labor for the Plaintiff on the ground of unfair sentencing on the grounds that the lower court acknowledged the criminal facts against the Plaintiff on October 31, 2018.

(Seoul District Court Decision 2017No3003). On April 25, 2019, the Supreme Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal (Supreme Court Decision 2018Do18048) and the said judgment (hereinafter “relevant criminal judgment”) became final and conclusive.

C. On November 24, 2017, the Intervenor’s educational institute rendered a judgment of the first instance court on the relevant criminal judgment, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s violation of the duty of good faith and the violation of the duty of integrity due to the receipt of money and valuables, such as the facts constituting the crime 1., and the Plaintiff’s dismissal of the Plaintiff on December 4, 2017 following a resolution to dismiss the C University Teachers’ Disciplinary Committee’ Disciplinary Committee.

D. D.

On January 2, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a petition for review on the first dismissal disposition with the Defendant.

On March 14, 2018, the Defendant rendered a decision to revoke the first dismissal of the Cuniversity teachers’ disciplinary committee on the first dismissal of the Defendant, on the ground that it violated the procedure stipulated in Article 65(1) of the Private School Act, since it did not hear the Plaintiff’s statement, even though it did not give two written summons notice to the Plaintiff.

E. On June 21, 2018, the Cuniversity Teachers’ Disciplinary Committee re-decided the dismissal of the Plaintiff on the following grounds, and the Intervenor’s private teaching institute is the Plaintiff on June 25, 2018.