1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant Foundation is an educational foundation that establishes and operates C Middle Schools (Gu D Middle Schools) and E High Schools, and the Plaintiff is newly appointed as a former D Middle School Teachers on May 1, 199 and served as a teacher and an assistant principal until April 12, 2017.

B. On March 3, 2017, the Defendant Foundation demanded the Teachers’ Disciplinary Committee of the Defendant Foundation to make a resolution on a disciplinary action against the Plaintiff. On March 17, 2017, the Defendant Foundation’s Disciplinary Committee of the Defendant Foundation issued a resolution on the Plaintiff’s dismissal of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant dismissal disposition”) on the following grounds: ① participating in a dispute over the management rights of the Defendant Foundation and giving and receiving remuneration for the employment of teachers; ② giving and receiving remuneration for maintaining teachers; ③ interference in the employment of new teachers; ④ interference in the recruitment of new teachers; ④ unjust receipt of family allowances and customized welfare expenses as grounds for disciplinary action; and notified the Plaintiff of the foregoing disposition on April 11, 2017.

C. On May 8, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a petition review with the Appeal Committee for Teachers seeking the revocation of the instant removal disposition, but the said Committee decided to dismiss the petition on July 5, 2017.

The relevant provisions of the Private School Act, etc. concerning the removal of this case shall be as specified in the attached Form.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 (including paper numbers), Eul's 18, and the purport of the body before oral argument

2. The removal of the Plaintiff’s assertion by the Defendant Foundation was based on the following erroneous or inaccurate facts, and it was unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretion as excessive compared to the degree of the Plaintiff’s misconduct.

1) Of the grounds for disciplinary action, with respect to intervention in the management dispute of the Defendant Foundation and the receipt of fees for the recruitment of teachers, the Plaintiff filed a complaint with respect to the receipt of fees for the recruitment of teachers from the Defendant Foundation for the normalization of the Defendant Foundation, and entered into a contract for the amount of management rights and water supply, but did not know that the KRW 10 million received from F was a fee for the recruitment of teachers. 2).