1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part arising from the supplementary participation.

. A person determined as the first head of a branch, the head of a team, or the Earlier Report among the vice-heads of a personnel committee, subject to separate deliberation and resolution by the personnel committee: Provided, That in cases of recommendations for disciplinary action of sexual harassment on the job, notification of disciplinary standards against a person who violates the prohibition of sexual harassment on the job (HR 597, Nov. 10, 2014) shall apply mutatis mutandis;

1. Purpose - Creation of a sound organizational culture and enhancement of fundamental professional ethics through clarification of the level of punishment for violations of sexual harassment;

2. Criteria for disciplinary actions determined.

(b) Criteria - At least 6 months of reduction of salary for at least 6 months of reduction of salary and at least 3 months of reduction of salary for at least 6 months of reduction of salary for at least 6 months of reduction of salary for at least 6 months of reduction of salary for at least 6 months of reduction of salary for at least 6 months of reduction of salary for at least 6 months of reduction of salary for at least 6 months of reduction of salary for at least 6 months of reduction of salary for at least 6 months of reduction of salary for at least 6 months of reduction of salary where the intention of misconduct classified as at least the whole reduction of salary in the case of a violation of sexual harassment in the workplace is extremely serious and there is gross negligence or intentional or gross negligence in the case of a violation of occupational harassment in the workplace; provided, however, it is possible to grant less than salary reduction in salary reduction exceptionally following the personnel committee where normal participation is necessary; * Of the intention of misconduct and negligence in the middle or majority of negligence of the victim's position in the subjective judgment.

C. (4) The content of the “Disciplinary Criteria against a person who violates the prohibition of sexual harassment on the job” committed by the Intervenor on November 10, 2014 is as follows:

(B) (Evidence No. 21). (B) The Plaintiff asserts that the “the position adjustment system,” which served as the basis for the instant position adjustment,” and “the disciplinary standard against a person who violated the prohibition of sexual harassment on the job,” were invalid since the rules of employment were modified disadvantageous to the worker without the worker’s consent. However, as seen earlier, “the position adjustment system” is with the intervenor.