beta
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.06.08 2016구합6379

해임처분 취소청구

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 4, 1993, the Plaintiff was appointed as a police officer on December 1, 201, and was promoted to the police officer on December 1, 2013. From December 28, 2015, the Plaintiff served as the head of the Ulsan Provincial Police Agency B police station and the head of the livelihood investigation team.

B. The Defendant: (a) committed the misconduct as indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant misconduct”); (b) committed the misconduct as listed in subparagraph (c) and removed the Plaintiff on January 27, 2016, following a resolution of the General Disciplinary Committee on Police Officers at B police stations, on the ground that the Plaintiff committed the misconduct as listed in Article 56 (Duty of Fidelity), Articles 57 (Duty of Good Faith), and 63 (Duty of Good Faith) of the State Public Officials Act; (b) Article 3 (Establishment of Service Rule) of the State Public Officials Regulations; (c) Article 78 (1) 1 and 3 of the State Public Officials Act; and (b) Article 78 (Grounds for Disciplinary Action) of the State Public Officials Act.

C. On February 7, 2016, the Plaintiff appealed and filed a petition review with the Ministry of Personnel Management. On July 7, 2016, the said appeals review committee rendered a decision to reduce the removal disposition by taking into account the favorable circumstances for the Plaintiff, even if it recognized the grounds for disciplinary action on July 7, 2016.

It is called the "disposition of this case" that has been mitigated due to dismissal.

(ii) [In the absence of dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap evidence 1 to 6, Eul evidence 1, 14 and 15 respectively, the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The act of misconduct committed on January 19, 2016, as of January 19, 2016, intended physical contacts as to whether the act of misconduct was inside the process of having the mind of not going beyond C, which was satched after his awareness, or having the head met.

There was no attempt to engage in any sexual conduct.

또 C을 모텔로 데려간 것은 스스로 집에 가는 것이 불가능해 보여 가까운 모텔에서 푹 자게 해야겠다는...