1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including costs incurred by participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

The plaintiff is a local public enterprise that manages and operates a housing site, housing development project, and public facilities by using approximately 270 full-time workers, and the intervenor is a person who has joined the plaintiff on October 13, 2003 and has worked as a natural recreation team team member of the facility operation headquarters.

On July 3, 2014, the Plaintiff’s audit office demanded the Plaintiff to take a heavy disciplinary action against the Intervenor on the ground that “the Intervenor issued bonds in an improper manner to cause liquidity crisis to the Plaintiff, and received a summary order of KRW 500,000 due to injury to the Plaintiff, and C administrative affairs audit demanded the Intervenor to take disciplinary action against the Intervenor on the ground that “the Intervenor sent off the bonds and debentures to the Plaintiff, and expressed the indemnite E by expressing the indemnity with the lower employees,” and the Plaintiff’s personnel committee decided on the disciplinary action against the Intervenor on July 9, 2014.

The notice of disciplinary action against the above reprimand was issued to the intervenors on July 9, 2014.

(hereinafter “instant reprimand disposition”) The Plaintiff’s president filed an application for review with the Personnel Committee on July 17, 2014 on the ground that the said disciplinary action falls short of the auditor’s heavy disciplinary demand.

On October 1, 2014, the president of the Plaintiff demanded the personnel committee to hold a review committee for severe disciplinary action against the Intervenor on the ground that “the Intervenor received a summary order of KRW 500,000,000 due to the crime of injury, causing a supposement between E and E in connection with the committee for the selection of the method of processing total facilities, which reported the contents thereof to the media, and caused enormous losses to the Plaintiff by having the extension project returned to C, despite the fact that D had caused enormous losses to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff’s president, who was in charge of the extension project returned to C, from the C Administrative Affairs Audit in 2013, displayed the conflict with E externally and affected the Plaintiff’s image and business trust.”

On October 13, 2014, the Plaintiff’s personnel committee decided to dismiss an intervenor on the ground of the foregoing disciplinary cause, and the Plaintiff was an intervenor on October 15, 2014.