1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the decision;

A. The Plaintiff is an educational foundation that establishes and operates D University, etc., and the Intervenor submitted a doctorate program (hereinafter “E”) under the title “E” on February 2004 and obtained a doctorate program from D University (hereinafter “instant doctorate”). Around March 1, 2004, the Plaintiff was newly appointed as a full-time lecturer at D University and was appointed as an associate professor on March 1, 2006, and on March 1, 2010, the Plaintiff was appointed as an associate professor.

B. A civil petition is filed on October 12, 2015 for the determination of plagiarism and revocation of a doctor’s degree, on the grounds that the thesis of this case was plagiarism at the Ministry of Education and D University, and that the thesis of this case was plagiarism. As such, D University’s management regulations for the Research Ethics Ethics Committee (hereinafter “management regulations prior to the amendment”).

The Preliminary Investigation Committee organized a Preliminary Investigation Committee and investigated whether the instant thesis was plagiarism. On October 19, 2015, the Preliminary Investigation Committee determined that the instant thesis is not subject to punishment of plagiarism and notified the results to the Ministry of Education and intervenors (hereinafter “First Investigation”).

(2) Around March 2016, the Ministry of Education and D University filed a new civil petition seeking an investigation of plagiarism of the instant thesis with the Ministry of Education and D University, thereby conducting a preliminary investigation via a preliminary investigation in accordance with the Regulations on Operation of the Research Ethics Promotion Committee (hereinafter “Operational Regulations”).

On October 21, 2016, the Research Ethics Review Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Research Committee”) shall hold a meeting on October 21, 2016 to determine the final outcome that the thesis of this case inappropriately used various thesiss in a substantial part of the theoretical structure (Chapter 2) and transfer the thesis of F (2003) into at least ten pages, thereby constituting plagiarism among research misconduct. The Research Ethics Review Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Research Committee”) shall determine the final outcome that the Research Ethics Evaluation Committee shall act on October 21, 2016.