1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On March 1, 1994, the Plaintiff was newly appointed as a full-time lecturer at the trade department operated by the Defendant, and was promoted to the four-year term of office as an assistant professor on April 1, 1997.

B. On December 16, 199, the Plaintiff posted a notice stating that, in the process of examination for the teaching and employment of professors in the field of international trade law in a collective unfair intervention in the course of a review for the employment of professors in the field of international trade law, the Plaintiff, as the title “E,” posted a notice stating that, in raising 10% of the basic salary from the faculty members as the school development fund, the Plaintiff had been forced to provide a written consent on the condition of non-voluntary, non- democratic collection and promotion (hereinafter referred to as the “instant notice”), each of the above notices were forced to provide a written consent (hereinafter referred to as “instant notice”).

C. On March 28, 200, the Plaintiff submitted a medical certificate to the effect that he/she suffered injury, such as fatum 5 balance, datum satum satum satum satum, datum satum satum satum (insatum, space satum satum, satum satum, and cerebrum satum satum, etc., and was paid three weeks (from March 29, 200 to April 18, 200) due to hospitalization, and the Defendant permitted this.

The plaintiff submitted a reinforcement plan to reinforce the amount of loss suffered by sick leave during the semester, but the reinforcement class was not conducted once until the semester ends.

On April 9, 2001, the Defendant opened the teachers’ disciplinary committee for reasons such as ① arranging the illegal medical act against F, who is a graduate school student, defamation of a school and injury to the dignity of a teacher due to unfair divorce; ② violation of duties due to the failure to implement a reinforcement plan; ③ violation of duties due to unfaithful classes; and negligence of duties; ③ violation of duties due to false teaching; and ③ violation of duties due to false teaching; and violation of duties due to such false teaching as identified on the relevant bulletin board, thereby impairing the honor of a school and a faculty member and impairing the dignity as a teacher.