1. On May 13, 2015, the Defendant filed a claim for revocation of dismissal (2015-136) between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor.

1. Details of the decision of this case

A. The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is a school juristic person that establishes and operates B University, etc., and the Plaintiff was appointed as C and professor on March 1, 2012 and served as the principal professor of the said Department from September 1, 2012.

B. On January 20, 2015, the Intervenor dismissed the Plaintiff on January 25, 2015 following the resolution of the Teachers’ Disciplinary Committee of B University on January 20, 2015.

(2) In relation to the “Management Love Development Fund” created by students with the amount of money provided for the development of the department, etc., the grounds for the dismissal of the instant case are set forth in Articles 1 through 3 (hereinafter “the grounds for dismissal of the instant case”).

2. In requesting the removal of D professors from office with other professors of the department, the university headquarters is responsible for hindering the progress of its normal administrative affairs and impairing honor (hereinafter “Disciplinary Reason 2”), and the students in the relevant department did not actively cope with the collective action of the students in the relevant department and did not comply with it.

(hereinafter “Disciplinary Reason 3”)

C. On February 24, 2015, the Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for review of the appeal to the Defendant, but the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff’s request on May 13, 2015.

(hereinafter referred to as "the decision of this case"). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including those with serial numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4, 6, and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the decision of this case is legitimate

A. At the time of the instant decision, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff violated the provisions of B University Development Management Fund and caused students to commit collective action, taking into account the grounds for the disciplinary action.

However, this is irrelevant to the grounds for dismissal, regardless of the authenticity of the decision in this case. Thus, the decision in this case causes for the petition review.