1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Details of decision on the petition examination;

A. On April 3, 1991, the Plaintiff has served as a teacher teaching English at C University’s middle schools and C University’s high schools annexed to C University established by the Intervenor (hereinafter “instant schools”).

B. The Plaintiff was in charge of the third and sixth years of the instant school in the year 2015.

However, the Plaintiff received 1 million won in cash from E in March 2015 and around May 7, 2015, respectively, from the mother of D, who is a student of March 6, 2015, and received 600,000 won in June 2015.

(hereinafter “Receiving money and valuables of this case”). C.

On December 29, 2015, an intervenor held a teachers’ disciplinary committee (hereinafter “instant disciplinary committee”) against the Plaintiff on the grounds of the receipt of money and valuables in the instant case.

In addition, the Disciplinary Committee recognized the fact that the Plaintiff received money and valuables in this case and decided to dismiss the Plaintiff.

Accordingly, around January 13, 2016, the intervenor notified the Plaintiff that “the Plaintiff was dismissed on the ground of disciplinary action against the acceptance of the instant money and valuables.”

(hereinafter “instant dismissal”) D.

On February 11, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a petition for a review on the dismissal of the instant case with the Defendant pursuant to Article 9(1) of the Special Act on the Improvement of Teachers’ Status and the Protection of Educational Activities.

However, on April 20, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s request for review of the appeal on the ground that “the instant disciplinary committee’s resolution was not defective and the grounds for disciplinary action is recognized and the amount of disciplinary action is also appropriate” (hereinafter “decision to review the appeal of this case”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry in Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the decision on the examination of the petition of this case is legitimate

A. The principal and teachers of the school of this case, who are disciplinary members, are all the teachers of the school of this case, claiming that there is a defect in the resolution of disciplinary action by the 1 disciplinary committee.