1. On May 15, 2019, the Defendant confirmed that the disciplinary action against the Plaintiff during one month of suspension from office is invalid.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a medical institution established under the Act on the Establishment of National University-affiliated Institutes.

The plaintiff worked as a nurse of the defendant hospital from March 23, 1985, before the defendant is converted into a corporation, and from August 11, 2014 to June 30, 2018, the plaintiff served as the head of the nursing support division (Grade III), from July 1, 2018 to June 14, 2019, and is in the position of Grade II nursing from June 15, 2019 to June 15.

B. On December 2016, the Plaintiff, as the director of the nursing support division of the Defendant Hospital, was in charge of recommending temporary employees in the nursing room, and as a temporary employee working in the Defendant Hospital left a public training course, efforts were made to support human resources by requesting the recommendation to the vocational training school in order to seek alternative human resources. However, the Plaintiff was unable to seek applicants due to the characteristics of the work mainly involving night work, patient transfer, cleaning, and various hearts.

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff discussed the above grievances to C, one’s own birth, and heard that C wishes to work as a temporary employee, and recommended D as a temporary employee.

The Plaintiff, around December 26, 2016, approved documents containing C to the special nursing division as the head of the nursing support division, and obtained the approval from the head of the nursing division D.

(hereinafter referred to as the “employment of this case”). (e)

On January 2019, the Ministry of Education, which was conducting an audit of the defendant for the transfer of the employment cost of a public institution, ordered the plaintiff to employ C with D's approval without avoiding participation and decision-making on the appointment of C, on the ground that the plaintiff violated the duty of avoidance of interest prescribed in Article 7 of the Guidelines for the Action of Officers and Employees of the defendant (hereinafter "Guidelines for Action of Officers and Employees"), and notified the defendant that he will be subject to heavy disciplinary action and submit the result of the disposition to the Ministry of Education.

Accordingly, the defendant's measure of heavy disciplinary action is unfair on February 27, 2019.