logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.09.19 2018가합5961
감봉처분무효확인등 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 1, 2004, the Plaintiff is a full-time lecturer appointed by the Defendant-affiliated C University as the assistant professor at C University D, and is currently working as the assistant professor at C University D, and the Defendant is a school foundation operating C University.

B. On April 19, 2018, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of an application for re-election at the expiration of the term of appointment. On April 24, 2018, the Plaintiff submitted three copies of research records for calculating annual salary: (i) “E (E)”, “F (Publication January 25, 2018)”, “G (Publication January 25, 2018)”, and “G (Publication January 25, 2018)” to the Plaintiff on June 7, 2018. (ii) On June 7, 2018, the Defendant deliberated that the Plaintiff’s application for re-election at the expiration of the term of appointment was inappropriate as a result of the faculty evaluation of the Plaintiff’s teaching profession, and thus, sent a letter to the teachers’ personnel committee to prepare for supporting materials.

3) On August 29, 2018, the Defendant, following the approval of the board of directors, notified the Plaintiff of the result of re-election with two years from September 1, 2018 to August 31, 2020. 4) The Defendant requested the Plaintiff to submit research materials to calculate the annual salary for re-election to the Plaintiff on August 28, 2018, and the Plaintiff on September 4, 2018.

B. (1) In addition to the written 3 books as referred to in paragraph (1), other than the written 3 books, the written 6 books in total (hereinafter “each of the books of this case”) shall be added to the written 3 books of “H (Issuance on April 10, 2018),” and (5) “I (Issuance on April 15, 2018),” and “J (Issuance on April 10, 2018).”

5) However, the Defendant recognized the Plaintiff as a major record of the annual salary calculation and granted 100 points to each of the research records for the purpose of examining the annual salary by giving a total of 600 points to each of the research records (for the purpose of examining the annual salary).

C. The plaintiff is reappointed.

arrow