파면처분취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case is that the part of the judgment of the court of first instance other than the part of the 5th to 6th 7th of the judgment of the court of first instance regarding “....” is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
A person shall be appointed.
C. 1) Determination 1) Whether to impose a disciplinary action on a person subject to disciplinary action who is a public official is at the discretion of the person having authority to take the disciplinary action. However, if the person having authority to take the disciplinary action as an exercise of its discretionary authority is recognized to abuse the discretionary power that has been left to the person having authority to take the disciplinary action, the disciplinary action against a public official shall be deemed to be unlawful. In order to deem that a disciplinary action against a public official has considerably lost validity under social norms, the disposition in this case is justified in light of the following circumstances: (a) the contents and nature of the act of misconduct causing the disciplinary action; (b) the administrative purpose to be achieved by the disciplinary action; and (c) the criteria for the determination of the disciplinary action; and (d) the contents of the disciplinary action are clearly and objectively unreasonable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Du620, Sept. 24, 2002).
① As seen earlier, the Plaintiff was prosecuted for committing the same crime as the instant disciplinary cause and was sentenced to imprisonment for ten months and the sentence became final and conclusive. As such, the amount recognized as a bribe received by the Plaintiff in the final and conclusive criminal judgment is KRW 2.5 million.
On the other hand, Article 723 of the Rules of the National Police Agency, which was amended on December 12, 2013, concerning disciplinary action taken by the former police officer, applied to the plaintiff's act, is amended.