1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 1, 1998, the Plaintiff was appointed as a fashion design and full-time lecturer at B University established and operated by the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”).

The plaintiff was promoted as an assistant professor on October 1, 2004, and from March 1, 2009, the plaintiff served as an assistant professor in tourism management.

B. (1) Around June 201, 201, the Intervenor filed a civil petition regarding the Plaintiff’s teaching method, etc. with respect to the first removal and cancellation (1) of the first removal and cancellation, and the Intervenor held the teachers’ personnel committee on September 30, 201.

The intervenor held the teachers' disciplinary committee following the consent of the teachers' personnel committee and the president's disciplinary proposal.

On January 26, 2012, the teachers’ disciplinary committee resolved to dismiss the Plaintiff on the following grounds, and the Intervenor notified the Plaintiff of the dismissal on February 7, 2012.

(hereinafter referred to as "the primary removal").

1) The Plaintiff, in the course of study, took part in the tape and took part in most of the class hours. The Plaintiff, during the class hours, took part in the tape, took part in his/her clothes, reported his/her believers, and took part in the clock. In other words, the Plaintiff neglected the student’s request for the correction of the class method, and forced the student to join the English East E.C.C., English East E.C., which he/she instructs the student to enter the English East E.C., which he/she instructs, while giving his/her interest such as sexual performance, employment, etc.

3. The Plaintiff received a reprimand on February 20, 2008 and a warning order on October 27, 2008 on the ground of the non-performance of class, which was issued on February 20, 2008 without permission, but the same and similar reasons were demanded to take disciplinary action. There is no pre-determination, such as refusing to state opinions in the teachers' personnel committee and teachers' disciplinary committee, denying all of the student civil petitions while attending the teachers' disciplinary committee, and thus, it is applicable mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 55 of the Private School Act.