1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are borne by the Intervenor joining the Defendant.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the court’s reasoning of this case is as follows, except for the addition of the judgment as to the argument of the Intervenor joining the Defendant under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, the court’s reasoning of this case is as follows.

2. The Defendant’s Intervenor’s assertion as to the dismissal of the Defendant’s Intervenor asserts that the dismissal disposition of the instant case was lawful, despite the error of deviation from or abuse of discretion, the first instance court held that the dismissal disposition of the instant case was unlawful, and thus, the first instance court’s dismissal disposition was unlawful, in light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff, who is in charge of the religious curriculum, has already failed to take place regardless of the Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor; (b) the Plaintiff, who is in charge of the religious curriculum, demanded the Plaintiff to have a higher morality than other general teachers; and (c) the Plaintiff’

In light of the above evidence, the defendant joining the defendant seems to have suffered some difficulties in the relationship between D and E from the time of delivery of D.

In addition, it is difficult to find a legal basis to require teachers in charge of religious subjects to be more moral than teachers in charge of other subjects, and as seen earlier, the plaintiff was not subject to criminal punishment after receiving a disposition of non-prosecution on suspicion of adultery.

In light of the existing disciplinary cases against teachers in light of the above circumstances, there is room for the instant dismissal disposition to be hot.

However, by the defendant joining the defendant's unlawful act with D, the rapid marriage between D and E led to the failure of the marriage.

The defendant joining the defendant who has committed this act continues to have been engaged in religious education at the school of this case and his sexual netity is also an important virtue.