1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Basic Facts

The defendant is a corporation established with the aim of contributing to C promotion by supporting the state planning, technology forecast and level survey, strategic formulation, D business survey, analysis and evaluation, budget adjustment and distribution, enhancing the improvement and effectiveness of D system, and efficiently performing affairs concerning C international cooperation.

On October 2008, the Plaintiff joined the Defendant’s Institute and served as the head of the knowledge and information office. On November 21, 2017, the Plaintiff was dismissed from the Defendant.

The defendant's dismissal of the defendant shall hold a disciplinary committee on August 28, 2017 and conduct two misconducts listed in the column for the disciplinary reasons (hereinafter "victim of this case") in the attached Form of the decision of disciplinary deliberation.

(1) On July 10, 2017, as well as on September 29, 2016, the act in F cafeteria located in Daejeon on July 10, 2017; and (2) on September 29, 2016, it violates the obligation to maintain the dignity of the Defendant’s Disciplinary Guidelines under attached Table 1 of Article 12 of the Guidelines for Disciplinary Action;

B. In other words, deeming that “(i) the degree of criticism is serious and intentional,” and decided to take disciplinary action against dismissal from among the pertinent type of disciplinary action.

On November 20, 2017, the Review Disciplinary Committee was held on the ground that the Plaintiff filed an objection against this, and the Review Disciplinary Committee also maintained disciplinary action against the Plaintiff, and the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of disciplinary action on November 21, 2017, which is the following day.

Article 12 attached Table 1 of the defendant's Guidelines for Disciplinary Action is classified as follows:

hereinafter referred to as "standards for disciplinary action of this case"

(b)the degree of misconduct in which disciplinary action is determined and the degree of misconduct is serious and intentional. (iii) The degree of misconduct is serious and gross negligence, and the degree of misconduct is weak and intentional.