해임처분취소
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 court's explanation of this case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the court makes a decision on the plaintiff's additional assertion under paragraph (2). Thus, this is acceptable as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure
2. In addition, the Plaintiff’s unlawful act is merely an act of delivering money or goods or acquiring part of it in violation of Article 53 of the Local Public Officials Act regarding “the duties of the head of Gun not related to the Plaintiff’s own duties.” Thus, the Plaintiff’s act did not constitute a violation of the duty of integrity under Article 2(1) [Attachment 2] of the Local Public Officials Disciplinary Rule.
However, as recognized earlier, while the plaintiff was a public official of Grade VI belonging to B in charge of the overall affairs of the cadastral resurvey conducted by B as a public official of Grade VI belonging to B in the office of B, the plaintiff is found to have been convicted of having used 3 million won for his own interest and the judgment becomes final and conclusive after being sentenced to a conviction of the plaintiff as a fact of using 10 million won and 18 million won for his own interest and delivered 25 million won to B head of the Gun with the knowledge that the director of the "E" selected as a joint implementer of the cadastral resurvey project with respect to F districts, G districts and H districts around April 2015 and around April 2016, in order to ensure that the advance payment of service costs for each of the above cadastral resurvey project would be made convenient, and the plaintiff's above unlawful act is related to the cadastral resurvey work performed by the plaintiff. Therefore, this part of the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.