1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff was established on December 27, 1990 and operated by C University using approximately 190 faculty members (hereinafter “instant University”). On November 20, 200, the Intervenor was punished on the ground that he/she was issued a false receipt for payment of enrollment fees to four foreign students with unpaid enrollment fees on November 23, 2012 while serving in general service after becoming a member of the University at the instant University on November 20, 200.

B. On December 26, 2012, the Intervenor filed an application for remedy with the Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission by asserting that the above disciplinary dismissal disposition constitutes an unfair dismissal as well as unfair labor practices conducted on the ground that it is the president of the trade union branch. On February 22, 2013, the Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission issued an order to pay the Intervenor wages that the Intervenor could have received during the Plaintiff’s reinstatement from office and dismissal, while deciding that the above disciplinary dismissal disposition constitutes unfair dismissal that abused the scope of the disciplinary discretion. However, the Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission issued an order to pay the Intervenor wages that the Intervenor could have received during the period of his/her dismissal.

(2012 only 674/Reno67). (c)

Accordingly, on March 22, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Intervenor filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission, respectively. On June 10, 2013, the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed both the Plaintiff and the Intervenor’s application for reexamination on the same grounds as the determination by the said Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission.

(The part concerning unfair dismissal in the above retrial ruling is referred to as the "instant retrial ruling"). 【The grounds for recognition - Each entry in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as a whole, of evidence Nos. 1 and 2.

2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is lawful

A. Although the Plaintiff’s assertion was made by issuing a false receipt for the payment of tuition fees to the unregistered student before the instant university, the decision on the reexamination of the instant case was made by the person in charge of the management of the student’s affairs, and was not submitted to the Immigration Office.