2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

On March 3, 2001, the Plaintiff was appointed as the naval noncommissioned Officer, and served in the 2bareboat Headquarters B from April 29, 2017.

On April 21, 2017, the Plaintiff was sentenced to a one-year suspended sentence of imprisonment for a crime of attempted indecent act by force by military personnel, etc., as follows at the General Military Court of the 2rd General Headquarters, and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

At the time, the plaintiff was detained for about 49 days.

On February 25, 2017, at around 11:45, the Plaintiff attempted to dance the Plaintiff’s face with the alcohol of the victim by exposing the victim’s face up to about 20 centimeters of the victim’s face, while the Plaintiff was working as a vice-office at the 2nd office of the 2nd office in Pyeongtaek-si B, and only left the 25 years old and the 25 years old and the 25 years on duty room of the victim. On the other hand, the Plaintiff attempted to drive the victim’s face up to 20 centimeters of the victim’s face by going back to the victim’s face. The Plaintiff attempted to drive the victim’s face up to 20 centimeters of the victim’s face with the victim’s face “I are not able to see it off.”

On May 12, 2017, the Plaintiff was subject to three months of suspension from office due to a violation of the duty to maintain dignity (sexual assault, etc.) by the second fleet commander of the Navy.

On August 10, 2017, Article 49 of the Enforcement Decree of the Military Personnel Management Act, and Article 56(2)1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Military Personnel Management Act, the Military Manpower Management Act, the Military Manpower Management Act, and Article 56(2)1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Military Personnel Management Act, shall be applied to a person who interferes with the Plaintiff’s work or damages the military’s prestige, or a person with a defect of character that may pose a danger to another person at the time of service or at the time of service.

On August 16, 2017, the Defendant rendered the Plaintiff a disposition of discharge from active service without being discharged from active service, according to the resolution of the committee for examination on discharge from active service.

hereinafter referred to as "the case."