징계처분취소청구
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On October 3, 1996, the Plaintiff was appointed as a fire-fighting officer and served in the House of Government Fire Service, and was transferred to the House of Government Fire Service on January 15, 2010, and served in the inside, rings, central, and personal center on January 15, 2010, and served as a fire-fighting vehicle driver at the C119 Safety Center located in Seocheon-si B from November 21, 2016.
On January 5, 2018, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol around 21:45, was driven by 0.207% of blood alcohol concentration (blood collection) and was found to have been driven by the police to move into his own vehicle at his own home at his own home for about 15 minutes on the ground that the substitute driver at the D front restaurant at Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, was not driven for about 500 minutes, and was exposed to a collision with the wall of the E community hall located at a place less than 500 meters away from the departure place and called for a report
B. On March 10, 2018, the Defendant made a demotion (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff committed the following misconduct (hereinafter “instant misconduct”) and violated Article 55 (Duty to Maintain Dignity) of the Local Public Officials Act. < Amended by Act No. 1510, Mar. 10, 2018; Act No. 1510, Mar. 10, 2018>
Meanwhile, the Plaintiff was notified of a summary order of KRW 5 million due to the instant misconduct.
C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal review with the Gyeonggi-do Appeal Committee on April 9, 2018, but the Gyeonggi-do Appeal Committee dismissed the said appeal review on May 8, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 14, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the absence of the grounds for disposition 1, the Plaintiff measured the respiratory level and measured the blood alcohol level at the time of increase in the blood alcohol level, and in particular, the blood alcohol level was reached the highest level, and thus, the Plaintiff is driving the vehicle.