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 disposition;

A. On July 13, 201, the Intervenor was appointed as an assistant professor of the C University and served on July 13, 201; (1) around December 201, the Intervenor published the D’s thesis (hereinafter “D”) in the E 31 collection; (2) around February 2012, the F’s thesis (hereinafter “F thesis”) in the E 32 collection; and (3) on December 20, 2013, the term “G” thesis (hereinafter “third thesis”); and (2) and the three thesis in the E 34 thesis in the E 1 or 3 thesis.

B. The Plaintiff, on May 7, 2015, removed the Intervenor from office on the ground that the Intervenor prepared the instant thesis in plagiarism with another thesis and received training costs unfairly.

C. On July 22, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision to revoke the removal of the Intervenor on the ground that the Plaintiff’s dismissal of the Intervenor was unlawful by abusing discretion, such as where the Plaintiff is deemed to be entirely aware of all grounds for disciplinary action, but is not equipped with the verification system, and taking a disciplinary measure (defensive and removal) on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s removal of the Intervenor’s Intervenor’s dismissal of the Intervenor was illegal by abusing discretion, such as not ensuring equity with other professors and disciplinary actions (hereinafter “instant decision”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 9 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. In light of the following facts and circumstances, prior to the legitimacy of the instant decision, it is difficult to view the instant decision to the effect that a disciplinary action against the Intervenor, who lost its validity by social norms, was an abuse of discretionary power, and thus, was committed against the Plaintiff, as the person having authority over disciplinary action, by going against social norms.

1. The facts that the intervenor has prepared the thesis of this case by plagiarism of other thesis.