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

The Defendant’s removal from office and the imposition of surcharges of KRW 287,901,00 against the Plaintiff on August 25, 2014 are revoked, respectively.

2. Purport of appeal

The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the Plaintiff regarding the imposition of surcharges shall be revoked. The imposition of surcharges of KRW 57,495,00 against the Plaintiff on August 25, 2014 by the Defendant shall be revoked.

On August 25, 2014, the first instance court revoked only the portion exceeding KRW 57,495,00 among the disposition imposing a disciplinary surcharge imposed on the Plaintiff on August 25, 2014, and dismissed all the claims filed by the Defendant for revocation of the disposition imposing a disciplinary surcharge of KRW 57,495,00 and the Defendant’s claim for revocation of the disposition imposing a disciplinary surcharge of KRW 57,495,00 against the Plaintiff on August 25, 2014. The Plaintiff filed an appeal only against the disposition imposing a disciplinary surcharge of KRW 57,495,00 against the lost portion, and the Defendant did not file an appeal against the lost portion. Accordingly, the scope of the judgment by the court is limited to the claim for revocation of the disposition imposing a disciplinary surcharge of KRW 57,495

The reasoning of this Court concerning this case is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is accepted by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for revocation of the disposition imposing disciplinary surcharge of KRW 57,495,00 is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just as it is concluded, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

Judges Kim Gin-han

Judge Lee Jae-soo