해임처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. From February 14, 1996, the Plaintiff served as a public official affiliated with B, and was in charge of general civil petition and vehicle registration from January 18, 2012 to July 25, 2013.
The Plaintiff, while collecting construction machinery mortgage registration fees in cash and collecting the collected fees, did not transfer the relevant registration documents to the person in charge of the registration of a motor vehicle, and did not separate the relevant registration documents from February 23, 2012 to July 19, 2013, and embezzled KRW 21,5,500,960 for personal purposes (hereinafter referred to as “occupational embezzlement”), and used them for personal purposes (hereinafter referred to as “occupational embezzlement”), and discarded the relevant documents by deducting the relevant documents, such as the application for registration, so that other persons cannot be identified.
(hereinafter referred to as "Invalidity of public documents"). (b)
On November 1, 2016, the Jeonnam-do Personnel Committee passed a resolution on disciplinary action against the Plaintiff, and the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff on November 4, 2016 pursuant to Article 69(1) of the Local Public Officials Act (amended by Act No. 13292, May 18, 2015; hereinafter the same shall apply) (hereinafter “instant disposition”), and the grounds for disciplinary action against the Plaintiff as stated in the explanation of grounds for disciplinary action and the written resolution on disciplinary action attached to the said notice are as follows:
C. The Plaintiff, who is dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed a petition review seeking the revocation of the instant disposition with the former Local Appeals Commission, but the said commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on March 12, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 4 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff has no interest in the lawsuit of this case, since the decision on the defense prior to the merits became final and conclusive by a fine of at least three million won for occupational embezzlement after the disposition of this case, and the local public officials shall automatically retire pursuant to Article 61 of the Local Public Officials Act.
However, even if the disposition of this case occurred later, the plaintiff is entitled to retire.