1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

1. Circumstances and details of the decision;

A. The Plaintiff is a school foundation that establishes and operates C University in the Cheongju-si.

The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) was appointed as a full-time lecturer on March 1, 2002 as the branch education division of C University University (hereinafter referred to as the “branch education division”) and was promoted to the assistant professor on April 1, 2004, and was promoted to the associate professor on April 1, 2008, and was in the position of president of C University from December 19, 2008 to January 31, 2009 (the Intervenor expressed his/her intention to resign from the position of president on December 22, 2008), and returned to the branch education and the associate professor on February 1, 2009.

B. On January 24, 2011, an intervenor was subject to removal from his/her position (hereinafter “the first removal from position”) on the ground that the disciplinary action was requested by the Plaintiff due to the reasons stated in attached Table 1, and on February 28, 201, the intervenor appealed against the first removal from position and the first removal from position, and on March 15, 201, filed a petition for review seeking revocation of the above dispositions with the Defendant. On June 13, 2011, the Defendant dismissed the first removal from position on the ground that “The first removal from position is legitimate, but the first removal from position is excessive,” and the first removal from office on the ground that the first removal from position was dismissed on March 15, 2011.”

3) The intervenor filed a lawsuit against the defendant in this court seeking the revocation of the above decision, and the defendant's decision on June 14, 2012 was rendered on the ground that "Article 3 and 7 of the grounds for disciplinary action as stated in the attached Table 1 recognized by the defendant can be recognized as grounds for disciplinary action, but the grounds for disciplinary action cannot be acknowledged as grounds for disciplinary action, and the defendant's decision to dismiss the application for revocation of the first removal from position and to change it into the dismissal disposition shall be deemed to have abused discretion."