2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

The reasoning for the court’s explanation of the instant case is as follows, except for addition or supplement of the judgment under the following 2.2. Thus, the court’s explanation of the instant case is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(1) The grounds for appeal by the Defendant do not differ significantly from the allegations in the first instance trial, and the fact-finding and determination of the first instance court are deemed legitimate, considering the evidence submitted to this court from the perspective of the evidence presented to this court. According to Article 55 of the Rules on the Personnel of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff’s assertion of addition or supplement, where the criteria for appointment are modified, the modified criteria shall begin to apply since one year from the date of change. On August 1, 2016, the Defendant amended Article 46 of the Rules on the Personnel of the Defendant, thereby adding “a lecture, etc.,” which had not existed in the past as the type of disciplinary action, and subsequently replaced the removal disposition by demotion on August 3, 2016. The instant

The Defendant newly established the term “competence, etc.” between dismissal and suspension from office among the types of disciplinary action through the revision of Article 46 of the Personnel Regulations on August 1, 2016. This is to alleviate the difference between the effect of disciplinary action against dismissal and suspension from office. As a result, the Defendant and the Plaintiff et al. were able to receive more favorable disciplinary action.

Therefore, the instant disciplinary action cannot be deemed unlawful.

Judgment

In full view of the above evidence, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the Defendant based on the overall purport of the statements and arguments set forth in Articles 12 through 14 above, the Defendant did not apply a disciplinary measure, and thus, the instant disciplinary measure is unlawful and invalid.

① According to Article 3 subparag. 9 of the Personnel Regulations of the Defendant, “an appointment to a lower class than the current class” means the appointment to a lower class by a disciplinary action, and according to Article 55(2), the appointment standards are modified.