logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2019.03.22 2018구합66463
교원소청심사위원회결정취소
Text

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.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a school foundation that operates C University located in Masung-si, and the Defendant joining the Defendant was newly appointed to C University as a full-time lecturer on March 1, 2007, and was promoted as an assistant professor on September 1, 2007 and as an associate professor on October 1, 2014, and was appointed as the vice president of C University from October 11, 2013 to February 4, 2015, and as the president from February 5, 2015 to February 1, 2017.

B. On November 23, 2017, the president of Cuniversity requested a resolution on disciplinary action against the Intervenor joining the Defendant to the president. On December 5, 2017, the Plaintiff’s president requested a resolution on disciplinary action against the Intervenor joining the Defendant on the ground that the Plaintiff’s Disciplinary Committee (hereinafter “Disciplinary Committee”) was eight grounds for disciplinary action.

(1) The Vice-President voluntarily executes the accounts for school expenses (hereinafter referred to as the "Disciplinary Reason 1") by full-time resolution (hereinafter referred to as the "Disciplinary Reason 1") (3) In order to prevent direct appointment of general staff members (hereinafter referred to as the "Disciplinary Reason 2"), due to unfair performance of a contract for decision on the establishment of university facilities (hereinafter referred to as the "Disciplinary Reason 3") (hereinafter referred to as the "Disciplinary Reason 4")

C. On December 11, 2017, the Disciplinary Committee arbitrarily amended and concealed the employee personnel regulations, and the grounds for disciplinary action stated in the above paragraph (8) are not recognized. In recognition of the grounds for disciplinary action Nos. 1 through 7, the contents of the disciplinary action No. 3 are as follows: (a) the Intervenor’s Intervenor appointed the total of 14 general service members without requesting the appointment of the Plaintiff’s president; and (b) six of them did not prepare a written appointment contract.

arrow