1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details and details of the instant decision

A. On June 1, 1986, the Plaintiff was appointed as a teacher of C High School B (hereinafter “B”), from September 1, 2007 to January 2015, the Plaintiff served as the principal of C High School (hereinafter “D High School”) (hereinafter “D High School”) and the vice principal of B-affiliated E middle school from September 1, 2015 to January 4, 2018.

B. Around 2017, the Gyeonggi-do Office of Education requested the Plaintiff to take a heavy disciplinary action (excluding dismissal) on August 8, 2017, after conducting an audit on B.

C. Accordingly, B convened the deliberation of the teachers’ disciplinary committee against the Plaintiff four times, and on January 4, 2018, dismissed the Plaintiff for the following reasons.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant dismissal”) 1.1. The provisions concerning teachers of national and public schools shall apply mutatis mutandis to the duties of integrity, the duties of service of private school teachers pursuant to Article 5(1) of the Private School Act violating the Code of Conduct for Public Officials, and the code of conduct for public officials of the Gyeonggi-do Office of Education shall apply mutatis mutandis to the code of conduct for school teachers under Article 81-1 of the School Foundation B

Therefore, a teacher of a private school is not entitled to receive, directly or indirectly, a reward donation or entertainment in relation to his/her duties pursuant to Article 61 of the State Public Officials Act, and he/she is not entitled to receive money or valuables from a public official related to his/her duties pursuant to Article 15 of the Code of Conduct for Public Officials of the Gyeonggi-do Office of Education (limited

Nevertheless, at the time of issuing orders from February 2010 to February 2016, the Plaintiff confirmed that: (a) the Plaintiff received money and valuables equivalent to KRW 5,885,00 from teachers other than F and nine other teachers; and (b) violated the duty of integrity and the code of conduct for public officials of the Gyeonggi-do Office of Education; and (c) according to the teachers’ statement at the time of the investigation by the Committee, according to the teachers’ statement, the date and amount of the gift purchase are different from the actual contents; and (d) the accurate details and amount are old.