1. On March 22, 2017, the Defendant filed a claim for revocation of a disposition rejecting the reappointment between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor (2017-107).

1. Details of the petition review and decision;

A. The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) was an educational foundation aimed at operating the C University. The Plaintiff was appointed as an assistant professor in contractual service at the Department of International Management Information at C University on March 1, 2013. On March 1, 2015, the term of appointment was from March 1, 2015 to February 28, 2017, and was appointed as an former assistant professor.

B. On October 18, 2016, the expiration of the term of appointment of the above assistant professor, the Plaintiff filed an application for deliberation on the reappointment with the intervenor on October 18, 2016, and the intervenor held a personnel committee on November 15, 2016 and deliberated on whether to re-appoint the Plaintiff.

(Re-employment of the Plaintiff upon request by the Plaintiff as above) C. (Re-employment of the Plaintiff is called “instant case”).

According to the results of the above review, on December 29, 2016, the intervenor refused to re-appoint the plaintiff on the grounds that the intervenor violated the rules of the intervenor's personnel management by entering the outside lecture without obtaining the president's prior permission for a total of four times in the first and second semesters of 2016, ② sexual treatment in violation of the rules of the intervenor's school regulations in the first semester of 2013 and the first semester of 2014, ③ it violates the rules of the intervenor's school regulations since the professor was in charge of the cost management accounting examination and supervision, ③ it did not comply with the rules of the intervenor's school regulations in the first and second semesters of 2016, ④ it did not comply with the worker's school regulations in the first and second semesters of 2016. In particular, 50 days among them did not observe the school hours and violated the rules of the teacher and staff, ⑤ it was given four warnings to the president of the Cuniversity on the grounds of violation of the provisions of the above paragraphs.

The disposition rejecting the reappointment of this case is "the disposition rejecting the reappointment of this case", and the grounds for refusing the reappointment of this case are "the grounds for refusing the reappointment of this case" and "the grounds for refusing the reappointment of this case" in accordance with the strict numbers for each reason.

D. On January 26, 2017, the Plaintiff revoked the disposition rejecting the reappointment of the instant case by 2017-107 against the Defendant.