징계처분취소
1. The Defendant’s penalty surcharge imposed on the Plaintiff on September 25, 2013 exceeds KRW 3,000,000, out of KRW 6,000.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The plaintiff is a public official who was appointed on August 9, 1980 and served in the period of harmony until now.
B. On June 10, 2013, the Government Joint Public Service Inspection Group of the Prime Minister verified that there was a misconduct in receiving money, entertainment, etc. from a work-related company, etc., and notified the Defendant of the result of the inspection of the Plaintiff through the Gyeonggi-do Governor.
C. On July 4, 2013, the Defendant requested the Gyeonggi-do Personnel Committee to make a decision on the disciplinary action on the grounds that he/she violated his/her duty of good faith, duty of integrity, etc. as stated in the Attached Disciplinary Reason 1 (hereinafter referred to as the “Disciplinary Reason 1”), respectively. Accordingly, the Gyeonggi-do Personnel Committee decided on September 2, 2013 with respect to the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “the instant disciplinary action”), and accordingly, on September 25, 2013, the Defendant demoted the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “the instant disciplinary action”), and was subject to a disciplinary action of KRW 6 million (hereinafter referred to as “the instant disciplinary action”), including the instant disciplinary action.
On October 11, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Gyeonggi-do Review Committee, but the said Review Committee dismissed it on December 16, 2013.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 (including where there are serial numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disciplinary action, etc. is legitimate
A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion related to the absence of the grounds for disciplinary action (A) C, the vice president of which related to the grounds for disciplinary action No. 1 of the instant case works, was selected as an urban planning service company for the creation of D Park in Sung-si around December 201. At that time, the Plaintiff was not related to the said business.