logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.13 2017가합506276
징계처분무효확인청구
Text

1. On March 9, 2016, the Defendant confirmed that the two-month disciplinary measure taken against the Plaintiff on March 9, 2016 was invalid.

2. The defendant.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The status of the parties is a school established by the defendant as an Buddhist organization C with the aim of gaining an indic personality. The plaintiff is a person who works as a staff member of D (the "E" before and after the change, and the "D" collectively) established by the defendant as an educational institution recognizing recognition of credits for profit purposes under its control.

B. D new students implementing the D’s special performance rating system in February 2014, 101, 1018, 2012, 892, 2013, 758, and 600, 2014.

In order to improve performance, D implemented a special performance-based wage system, based on 782 students on May 21, 2014 (759 students registered as new students, and 23 students enrolled) in proportion to the number of students exceeding the above standard number of students.

C. Mitigation of D’s eligibility requirements for transfer students, on May 28, 2014, when entering the two semesters, acquired at least one semester 15 credits at regular universities and credit recognition institutions: Provided, That in the case of those who hold office in the film, video, or night applicants, the requirements for acquiring at least 12 credits (hereinafter “existing qualification requirements”) were deleted so that they may support transfer students, regardless of whether they have credits at the former universities and credit recognition institutions.

In the second semester of 2014, D was recruited by 763 enrolleds and 48 enrolled students in the second semester of 2014, and 24 of 48 enrolled students did not obtain credits.

After all, D paid piece rates according to the above performance as indicated below.

E. On March 9, 2016, the Defendant’s disciplinary action against the Plaintiff shall take disciplinary action against the Plaintiff on the following grounds: (a) Article 16(1)2 of the D Principles; (b) Article 16(1)1 of the D Principles (Disciplinary Action).

2. The intention or.

arrow