Where a person who is subject to a disciplinary action under the Private School Act contests the invalidation of disciplinary action, the purpose of such request (the indication of the text)

If an educational foundation takes disciplinary action against the head of a private school established and operated by the educational foundation under the Private School Act, seeking confirmation of invalidity in a lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of disciplinary action against the plaintiff is not the disciplinary action against the defendant foundation, but the disciplinary action against the defendant foundation is not the disciplinary action against the defendant foundation.

Article 61 of the Private School Act

Plaintiff

Attorney Han-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 72Na2981 delivered on September 18, 1973

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

Before determining the grounds of appeal by the Defendant’s attorney, the case is examined ex officio;

According to the various provisions of Article 61 of the Private School Act, where a school foundation intends to take disciplinary action against the head of a private school that it establishes, the chief director of the school foundation shall request the teachers' disciplinary committee to take disciplinary action; the teachers' disciplinary committee shall prepare a written resolution and notify it to the relevant foundation; the person who is an appointing authority shall take disciplinary action according to the written resolution within seven days from the date it is notified; and the appointing authority shall deliver a written decision stating the grounds for disciplinary action to the principal who is subject to disciplinary action; and the principal may request a review to the Review Committee established by the relevant school foundation if he/she is dissatisfied with such disciplinary action. According to the written complaint of this case, the court below stated that the plaintiff who is the chief of the school foundation established and operated by the defendant as the ground for his/her claim and stated that the plaintiff's disciplinary action (definite) is invalid due to the plaintiff's disciplinary action (definite of the court below's decision) pursuant to the above decision of the court below's first instance court's decision that the plaintiff's disciplinary committee's disciplinary action is invalid or invalid.

Therefore, the court below should reverse the judgment of the court below and remand the case to the court below without making a decision on the appeal in order to re-examine and determine the propriety of the plaintiff's claim.

This decision is consistent with the opinions of the involved judges.

Justices Lee Byung-ho (Presiding Justice)