2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On April 8, 2011, the Plaintiff was specially employed as a chief executive officer of CARE on two occasions, and worked in a hearing and inspection office of the C police agency until February 8, 2014, and worked as a police officer in exclusive charge of victims from February 9, 2015 to the auditor office of the D police station.

B. On June 8, 2015, the Defendant issued a dismissal disposition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff violated Articles 56 (Duty of Fidelity) and 57 (Duty of Fidelity) of the State Public Officials Act as the grounds for the disciplinary action (hereinafter “instant grounds”) as set forth below (hereinafter “instant grounds for disciplinary action”).

Any police officer of the Company shall have the duty to observe the laws and regulations and to faithfully perform his duties, and in particular comply with any order of his superior officer and shall not engage in any conduct detrimental to internal integrity, such as the booming of his or her superior, without prejudice to internal integrity;

A. On February 1, 15, 12:28 on February 1, 15, 15's 12:28, F's violation of the duty to obey orders, such as non-compliance with instructions, even though the head of the NCARE's order was issued by the Director of the Audit and Inspection Division (Seoul), a superior officer of the Regional Office of CARE, to advise the criminal suspect on suicide and to advise him/her of the suicide, "A suspect's family member is not a internal duty because only the victim consulted," and the criminal suspect's family member's family member's family member is not a internal duty, and he/she refuses to comply with his/her order in a way that he/she does not respond to a written request without telephone, and she is directly superior officer on February 16, 19, 195's 19's 10's 10's 10's 0's 1's 0's 1's 's 0'.'.