Text
1. All appeals filed by the Defendant and the Intervenor are dismissed.
2. The portion resulting from the participation in the appeal costs.
Reasons
1. The court's explanation concerning this part of the decision is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing this in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is lawful
A. On July 8, 2015, the Plaintiff Intervenor interfered with the fair exercise of voting rights by disciplinary committee members through intimidation remarks that would give disadvantages to disciplinary committee members if he/she was present at the Disciplinary Committee held on July 8, 2015, and thus, the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the second ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the second ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the disciplinary action. Furthermore, the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the first and fifth ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the disciplinary action is appropriate since the trust relationship between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor was breached to the extent that it could not be recovered. 2) The Defendant and the Intervenor did not unilaterally use the grounds for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the ground for the disciplinary action.
In addition, the intervenor obtained the oral approval of the plaintiff's side for the outside lecture, and intentionally did not unfairly demand overtime pay, and the ground for the fourth ground for the disciplinary action does not constitute justifiable grounds.
The Intervenor and K are required by learners to disclose data.