beta
Text
1. The defendant's KRW 15,00,000 for each of the plaintiffs and 5% per annum from February 25, 2015 to December 11, 2018, respectively, shall be applicable to the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 1, 2008, Plaintiff A served as E University (hereinafter “instant University”) operated by Defendant Educational Foundation D (hereinafter “Defendant Educational Foundation”) as F, full-time lecturer, or assistant professor, and Plaintiff B was appointed as a full-time professor on September 1, 201, and Plaintiff C was employed as a full-time lecturer or assistant professor on March 1, 201.
G was appointed by the president on April 30, 201, as the president of the instant university, as the south of the network H, a founder of the instant university.
B. On August 4, 2014, Plaintiff A filed a complaint with the Netcheon Police Station by sexual indecent act, etc., and Plaintiff C filed a complaint with the office of the competent District Prosecutors’ Office of Gwangju District Prosecutors on January 14, 2015 by sexual indecent act, etc.
C. On February 25, 2015, the audit team of the Defendant’s Corporation issued the following disciplinary measures against the Plaintiffs: (i) the first auditor from December 2014 to January 5, 2014 with respect to F; (ii) the second auditor from January 6, 2015 to February 13, 2015; (iii) the second auditor from March 10 to March 26, 2015 to March 26, 2015; (iv) the Plaintiffs purchased training materials in relation to the beauty program; (iii) the student scholarship was embezzled or embezzled for any other purpose; and (iv) the student scholarship was unfairly received from the National Treasury; and (v) the Plaintiff provided a false statement that his/her subsidies were unfairly paid; and (v) the Plaintiff provided a false statement that his/her subsidies were excessively paid.
On February 24, 2015, the board of directors of the university of this case resolved a proposal for a request for disciplinary decision against the plaintiffs. On February 24, 2015, Article 58-2(1)1 and 2 of the Private School Act and Article 44(2)1 and 2 of the articles of incorporation of the defendant corporation decided to remove the plaintiffs from position on February 25, 2015, and the defendant corporation was released from position.