1. On October 14, 2013, the Defendant’s dismissal against the Plaintiff is confirmed to be null and void.

2. The defendant shall be the plaintiff and Ga.

1. The facts following the premise facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the whole purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 10, 22, and Eul evidence Nos. 1, 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 10, 22, and 1 to 7

On December 1, 2003, the Plaintiff was appointed as a full-time lecturer at the University of Arts, Culture, the Department of Arts, the Department of Arts, and the Department of Arts of the University, and since March 1, 2010, as an associate professor at the University of Arts, the Department of Arts, the Department of Arts, the Department of Arts, and

On September 26, 2013, the Defendant’s teachers’ disciplinary committee determined that the Plaintiff violated the duty to maintain dignity as a teacher, the principal portion of teachers, and official duties, on the grounds that the grounds that the grounds for the disciplinary action (hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”) are recognized as follows, and decided to dismiss the Plaintiff on the ground of Article 61(1)1 through 3 of the Private School Act, taking into account the following disciplinary action (hereinafter “the grounds for the disciplinary action”), and accordingly, the Defendant’s representative director dismissed the Plaintiff on October 14, 2013.

Grounds for Disciplinary Action

1. On January 14, 2013, the Plaintiff gathered eight students specializing in art, design, university, motion picture major, and made the following remarks as to C professors belonging to the same major for two hours.

① There is a question that C professors received several hundred million won in the course of managing credits of celebrators or entering celebrators, and it is necessary to vindicate the source of the funds by purchasing apartment bonds for three years.

② On December 22, 2012, C professor stated that the president should take disciplinary action against the Plaintiff on the ground that he/she did not give credit to the Plaintiff or an artist student. Accordingly, the president took the position that he/she would be suitable for the Plaintiff’s credits.

(3) If a student shows his/her behavior to assist C professor who is under investigation with respect to the creation of a film major, the student who receives a scholarship shall also be punished by the prosecution.