1. It is confirmed that the Defendant’s disposition rejecting the reappointment of the Plaintiff on February 28, 2010 against the Plaintiff is invalid.

2. The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is an educational foundation that establishes and operates C University, and the Plaintiff entered into an employment contract with the Defendant on March 1, 2008 to February 28, 2010 with the term of employment from March 1, 2008 and served as a full-time lecturer in the hotel management department at C University Tourism University.

B. On October 30, 2009, four months prior to the expiration of the Plaintiff’s term of appointment, C University notified the Plaintiff of preparing and submitting an application for examination of reappointment by November 13, 2009. Accordingly, the Plaintiff prepared an application for examination of reappointment of teachers on November 13, 2009 and submitted it to C University.

C. On November 30, 2009, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff agreed to prepare a school document that reversed the order of evaluation, and submitted data based on the document written in an unlawful manner to the Defendant’s board of directors, leading the Defendant to be appointed, thereby hindering the Defendant’s new appointment of teachers by deceptive means.”

However, on February 22, 2010, the Appeal Commission for Teachers revoked the above dismissal disposition on the ground that it is difficult to recognize the grounds for disciplinary action against the Plaintiff by accepting the Plaintiff’s request for revocation of dismissal disposition, which became final and conclusive later.

On March 16, 2010, the Defendant revoked the dismissal disposition against the Plaintiff and issued a personnel order to appoint the Plaintiff as a full-time lecturer in the hotel management department at Cuniversity by February 28, 2010, the employment period of the Plaintiff. On August 25, 2010, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff salary up to February 28, 2010.

E. After that, while discussing the follow-up procedure following the decision to revoke the Plaintiff’s dismissal in the Defendant Teachers’ Personnel Committee, the Plaintiff’s thesis published in duplicate in the course of the examination for appointment was evaluated as research performance.

Accordingly, the defendant submitted the research performance that overlaps with the master's degree thesis in the first semester of 2008 in October 1, 2010.