1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

An intervenor who was employed by the plaintiff on March 1, 2010 and served as a dietitian in B High School.

On November 20, 2015, the Office of Education of Gwangju Metropolitan City conducted an audit on B high schools, and on December 4, 2015, requested the Incheon Metropolitan City Office of Education to resolve disputes against the Intervenor on the grounds of the Intervenor’s misconduct (information of the expected volume of food materials to be purchased, disturbance of accounting order, demand for supply to specific goods of a specific company, dietitian’s duty failure, and suspicion of embezzlement of public funds).

On December 23, 2015, the personnel committee passed a two-month decision of suspension from office against the intervenor (or subsequent resolution on the suspicion of embezzlement of public funds according to the results of investigation).

On January 6, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a request for reexamination with the personnel committee on the ground that the above resolution of the personnel committee is less severe.

On January 19, 2016, the personnel committee accepted the Plaintiff’s request for reexamination, and decided to dismiss the Intervenor on the ground of the Intervenor’s misconduct as follows. On February 2, 2016, the Plaintiff dismissed the Intervenor as of February 5, 2016.

(hereinafter “instant dismissal disposition”). On September 11, 2015, the Plaintiff publicly announced the purchase of food materials with a wrong basic amount for meal service and executed the purchase amount exceeding 6,019,200 won, reported to the manager, and did not have made any effort to correct any mistake, such as amending the contract after reporting to the manager. Rather, to conceal this, the Plaintiff voluntarily instructs the contracting company to deliver the alternative goods to a third party, and instruct the contracting company to transfer the balance of KRW 3,648,000 remaining after the delivery of alternative goods to a third party. - On February 11, 2016, the Intervenor filed a request for reexamination with the Personnel Committee on the ground that the determination of dismissal of the instant food materials was excessive, but the Personnel Committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for reexamination on February 24, 2016.

An intervenor on March 24, 2016