1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

The plaintiff is a school foundation that established and operated C University, etc., and the intervenor was appointed as professor of C University on March 1, 1996 and served as a professor for culture.

The Plaintiff removed the Intervenor on December 15, 2014 following the resolution of the teachers’ disciplinary committee, following the grounds for disciplinary action as follows.

(hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”). 【Grounds for Disciplinary Action】

1. An intervenor who damages the reputation of a school (hereinafter referred to as "Disciplinary Reason 1") by continuously inserting a letter of slandering A and C University in a large number of press media, such as Handoles, SBS, and sound from the public, after April 2014;

2. From September 14, 207 to May 31, 2013, the intervenor who violated the duty to hold concurrent offices (hereinafter “Disciplinary Reason 2”) filed an appeal against the Defendant on December 22, 2014, which was dissatisfied with the instant disciplinary action and decided on March 11, 2015 on the ground that “the instant disciplinary action is lawful, but it is recognized only the grounds for disciplinary action No. 2, and it is excessive to take disciplinary action,” and Article 23 of the Private School Act which prohibits the concurrent office of teachers was changed to one month from suspension from office.”

(2) The Plaintiff asserted that the instant disciplinary action was lawful for the following reasons, and the Defendant’s decision was unlawful: (a) there was no dispute regarding the instant decision (hereinafter “instant decision”); and (b) the Plaintiff asserted that the instant disciplinary action was mitigated for one month from suspension from office on the ground that the conclusion was different; and (c) the instant decision was unlawful.

The intervenor of the grounds for disciplinary action (Disciplinary Reason No. 1) shall publish advisory advisers in a number of media media in order to make the musical sentiment and conflict between the former president and the latter president and to maintain the influence of the forces to which he/she belongs.