1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that operates a solar power plant installation business, electrical construction business and solar power generation consulting business, and the Defendant holds a civil engineering industrial engineer and electrical engineer’s license.

B. On November 24, 2014, the Plaintiff concluded a labor contract with the Defendant and employed the Defendant by setting the annual salary of KRW 36,000,000.

Since then, the Defendant served as the head of the respective site of the installation work site of solar power plants on the Plaintiff’s land outside Seocheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and two lots of land (hereinafter “instant Dri site”) and the installation work site of solar power plants on the land outside Seocheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and two lots of land (hereinafter “instant Fri site”).

C. The Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 5,60,000 on July 23, 2015, when a person who obtained permission for mountainous district conversion intends to change the permitted matters from the Minister of the Korea Forest Service, etc., but from January 3, 2015 to the 16th day of the same month, when obtaining permission for mountainous district conversion from the head of Seocheon-gun, the Defendant damaged adjacent forest land 4,664 square meters without obtaining permission for change from the head of Seocheon-gun, Seocheon-gun, while creating a site for solar power infrastructure and access road. The Plaintiff was issued a summary order of KRW 5,660,00 (the Daejeon District Court Hongsung Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Decision 2015No1469).

On February 29, 2016, the Plaintiff terminated the employment contract with the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1, 2, 3-3, Gap evidence 7-1, Gap evidence 21, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant, while working as the site manager at the instant Ri site, unlawfully damages adjacent forest land that did not obtain permission for mountainous district conversion against the Plaintiff’s instruction or intent and committed various unlawful acts, such as construction of land boundary failure, illegal timbering, and illegal neglect of forest waste, etc. in this process or before and after that process.