Text
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 4,770,398 and KRW 14,400,00 among them.
Reasons
1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be found as a whole in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 25, 26, 27, and Eul evidence Nos. 11 through 14 (including serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply).
On March 1, 2002, the Plaintiff was appointed as a branch education and full-time lecturer at C University University (hereinafter “the first removal from office”) operated by the Defendant, and on January 24, 201, the Plaintiff was appointed as a associate professor on January 24, 201.
(B) On March 15, 2011, the Plaintiff was dismissed on February 28, 201 as the Disciplinary Reason No. 1 annexed hereto. (B) The Plaintiff filed a petition review with the Appeal Commission for the revocation of each of the above dispositions against the first removal from position and removal, and the Appeal Commission for Teachers was dismissed on March 15, 201, and the remainder of the 4,5, and 7, and 6, which are deemed grounds for disciplinary action but are not recognized as grounds for disciplinary action. Although the first removal from position is lawful, the Plaintiff dismissed the application for the revocation of the first removal from position on the ground that the first removal from position is excessive, and the legal relationship between the teacher and the school juristic person is altered by the said decision (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da8880, May 9, 2012).
AB made it.
C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative litigation against the above decision, and the Seoul Administrative Court rendered a judgment on June 14, 2011, 201Guhap19710, Article 3, 3, and 7 of the Attached Disciplinary Grounds No. 1, which were recognized by the Teachers’ Appeal Committee, can be recognized as grounds for disciplinary action, but the foregoing Articles 1, 2, and 1, 2, and 8 cannot be deemed as grounds for