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

A. The Plaintiff is a local public official appointed on January 26, 1985 and currently serving as the head of the Transport Guidance Administration Team at the B City Headquarters Traffic Guidance Division.

B. On June 8, 2018, the Defendant imposed two months of suspension from office and disciplinary additional charges (2,244,000 won) on the Plaintiff due to the following disciplinary reasons (hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”).

The Plaintiff’s ground for disciplinary action was issued as C Headquarters Bus Policy Team on March 20, 209 and became aware of D (the E representative director of a stock company) first, and thereafter came to know of D (the amount equivalent to KRW 100,000,000 from that date, KRW 20,000,000,000,000 per annum 3,000,0000,000,000 won on February 11, 2015, KRW 1,000,000,000,000 won on September 17, 2015, and January 23, 2016;

9.8. Receipt, respectively, of gift equivalent to KRW 748,00 in total, by being provided with two fruits equivalent to KRW 49,000.

Articles 53(1), 69(1)1 and 2, and 69-2 of the Local Public Officials Act, Articles 12(1) and 13(1) of the Code of Conduct for Public Officials in the City

C. On June 18, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a request for review of an appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the Local Appeals Commission, but the said review committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for review of appeal on October 2, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. 1) The Plaintiff was on the bus policy of the C Headquarters from March 20, 209 to March 14, 2013, from March 15, 2013, from March 15, 2013 to January 11, 2015, the transport operation of the said headquarters (hereinafter referred to as the “CF”), the taxi logistics division from January 12, 2015 to January 10, 2016, and the transport guidance division from January 11, 2016 to August 7, 2018, and thereafter served in the transport policy division from that date to that date. 2) The specific duties of the Plaintiff were as follows:

On March 2009 to March 2013, 2013, the bus policy and the overall control of regular service routes of urban buses, and the improvement of the system on the adjustment of service routes from March 2013 to January 2015.