1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 1, 2014, the Plaintiff was appointed as the Grade B Staff Staff at B University on November 1, 2014, and was serving in the Library’s academic information department on May 3, 2016.

B. The Plaintiff was indicted as follows by Busan District Court Decision 2017Ma2616 on the charge of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Acts at Public Smuggling Places). On September 11, 2017, the Plaintiff was convicted of the above criminal facts and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of KRW 2 million. The said judgment became final and conclusive on September 19, 2017.

On April 7, 2017, at around 19:10, the Plaintiff committed an indecent act against the victims in the dynamic car, which is a means of public transportation, by committing an indecent act against the victims of approximately 2 minutes of the 8 minutes of the son E (n, 23 years of age) on the electric car operated as female room in the Seoul subway Line 9 line, located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, with his own sexual organ, and by committing an indecent act against the victims of approximately 2 minutes of the son E until the her sexual organ arrives in the F Station. On the same day, the 19:12 on the same day the her previous car starts from the F Station, and the her sexual organ came from the F Station, and thereby, committed an indecent act against the victims of approximately 8 minutes of the son G until the her previous car arrives in the H Station.

C. On November 3, 2017, the Ministry of Education passed a resolution to dismiss the Plaintiff pursuant to Articles 63 and 78 of the State Public Officials Act and Article 2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Decree of the Punishment of Public Officials on the grounds of the same disciplinary cause as the above criminal facts (hereinafter “instant disciplinary cause”). Accordingly, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff on November 22, 2017 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

On December 11, 2017, the Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed a petition review with the appeals review committee, but was dismissed on April 5, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1-10 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff.