1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff worked at the Human Elementary School during the evaluation period of the performance bonus rating in 2013 (from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012), and currently worked at another school.

B. In determining the grade for the payment of performance bonus, the Committee for the Deliberation on Teachers’ Performance and Bonuses (hereinafter “the Committee”) affiliated with the Defendant in 2013 (hereinafter “the Committee”) granted 88 points to the Plaintiff as follows and decided as “B grade” as it fell under 44 out of 61 total teachers, and the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the said result on March 6, 2013.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition”). If the Plaintiff’s non-high class map (30 points) of the detailed items in the field is omitted 29 points omitted, 10 points for the job performance evaluation (10 points), 4, 3, 2, 1) of the Plaintiff’s entry (10 points), 10 points for the job performance evaluation (5, 4, 3, 2, 1) of the Plaintiff’s entry (10 points) omitted, 29 points for the life guidance (20 points) of the Plaintiff’s entry (30 points) omitted, 88 points in total (5, 4, 3, 2, 1) 1 points for the Plaintiff’s entry (10 points).

C. On March 12, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an objection, but the Defendant did not accept the objection on April 16, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s instant disposition is unlawful for the following reasons.

1) 피고는 2012년도 상반기에 원고를 포함한 2012년도 성과상여금 심사위원회 위원들과의 회의를 거쳐 2013년도 성과상여금 평가기준을 미리 만들어놨었는데, 위 B 등이 민원을 제기하자, 2012. 9. 5. 회의를 열어 새로운 평가기준을 만들고, 이후 또 다시 임의로 위 평가기준을 위ㆍ변조하였다. 2) 피고는, 원고가 위와 같은 평가기준 설정절차에 대하여 항의하자, 2012년도 심사위원인 원고를 심사위원에서 배제시킨 채 2013년도 성과상여금 심사위원회를 구성하고, 원고에게 불리한 2013년도 성과상여금...