1. As to the case on March 23, 2016, the Defendant’s revocation of revocation of dismissal No. 2016-1 between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor joining the Defendant.

1. Details of the decision;

A. The Plaintiff is a legal entity that establishes and operates the C University, and the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) is a person who was appointed as a hotel management of C University and a professor holding concurrent positions on March 1, 2013 and served as an assistant professor on September 3, 2014.

B. On August 27, 2015, the Plaintiff’s president demanded a disciplinary resolution against the Intervenor to the chairperson of the Plaintiff’s teachers’ disciplinary committee on the ground that “the Plaintiff’s disciplinary committee’s disciplinary action against the Intervenor by operating and operating the NCS-based on-site learning and occupational learning program, neglecting duties, neglecting trust in the process of settling the program, reducing government subsidies, bringing disadvantages to school, and cancelling appointment due

C. On November 24, 2015, the Plaintiff’s teachers’ disciplinary committee held a disciplinary committee and decided to take disciplinary action against the Intervenor by recognizing the grounds for disciplinary action “retirement” as follows: (a) the Plaintiff’s teachers of C University who operate a project without complying with the regulations and guidelines as a person in charge of the NCS-based on site learning program and the NCS-based work learning program supported by the National Treasury; and (b) the pertinent act as a professor of C University; and (c) the operation of the said program as a person in charge of the business without complying with the regulations and guidelines.

On December 7, 2015, the Plaintiff deliberated on the above disciplinary resolution by the board of directors on the same day, and notified the intervenors of the result of such disciplinary resolution by the said disciplinary committee.

(hereinafter “instant dismissal disposition”) e.

On January 6, 2016, an intervenor filed a petition with the Defendant seeking revocation of the instant dismissal disposition under 2016-1.

Accordingly, according to Article 53-2 (1) 1 of the former Private School Act (amended by Act No. 13938, Feb. 3, 2016), the Defendant’s appointment and dismissal of private school teachers is subject to deliberation and resolution by the board of directors of the relevant school juristic person, and the deliberation and resolution by the board of directors is required prior to the request for resolution by the board of directors.