1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. Of the appeal costs, the part resulting from the intervention is the Intervenor joining the Defendant.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following 2.2. Thus, this case is quoted as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420

2. The Defendant and the Intervenor asserts to the effect that the disciplinary action on dismissal of the instant case is appropriate, even if only the grounds for the disciplinary action against the Plaintiff are acknowledged, in light of the nature of the work performed by the Plaintiff, even though the grounds for the disciplinary action against the Plaintiff are very serious. The dismissal of the relevant employee is justified in a case where there are reasons attributable to an employee to the extent that it is impossible to continue the employment relationship with the relevant employee under generally accepted social norms. Whether it is impossible to continue the employment relationship with the relevant employee should be determined by comprehensively examining various circumstances, including the purpose and nature of the relevant employer’s business, the circumstances of the relevant workplace, the status of the relevant employee, the details of the relevant employee’s duties, the motive and background of the relevant act of misconduct, the influence that the relevant employee’

(1) In light of the above legal principles, the dismissal of the Plaintiff and the Intervenor is more severe than the Plaintiff’s misconduct and thus exceeds the scope of the discretion on disciplinary action. In light of the above legal principles, the dismissal of the Plaintiff is more severe than the Plaintiff’s misconduct and thus, it is reasonable to deem that the dismissal of the Plaintiff exceeded the scope of the discretion on disciplinary action. In light of the above legal principles, the dismissal of the Plaintiff is more severe than the Plaintiff’s misconduct, and the dismissal of the Plaintiff is more severe than the Plaintiff’s misconduct, and the dismissal of the Plaintiff is more severe than the Plaintiff’s misconduct, and the dismissal of the Plaintiff is more severe than the Plaintiff’s dismissal of the Plaintiff.

Accordingly, the defendant and the defendant.