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

A. The Plaintiff is a public official who is appointed as a local administrative secretary in Yeongdeungpo-gu Busan Metropolitan City in July 2015 and is working in the Young-gu Busan Metropolitan City Office B after being promoted to a local administrative assistant in July 2015.

B. On November 16, 2015, the Plaintiff issued the National Democratic Public Officials’ Union (hereinafter “Private Labor Union”) to Busan Regional Headquarters C, and applied for a leave of full-time employment to the Defendant. On December 28, 2015, the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to take a leave of full-time employment for two years (from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2017).

C. On January 27, 2016, the Defendant was requested by the Minister of the Interior to issue an order of reinstatement for reasons, which constitutes a collective act for the purpose other than the purpose of temporary retirement and non-public duties.

On February 26, 2016, the Defendant issued the first reinstatement order pursuant to Article 38-17 of the Decree on the Appointment of Local Public Officials on the ground that it was confirmed that the Plaintiff was using the Plaintiff for a non-purpose of leave of absence, and issued the second reinstatement order on March 7, 2016 as the Plaintiff did not comply therewith.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition”) e., the order of reinstatement;

On March 28, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a petition review seeking revocation of the order of reinstatement with the Busan Metropolitan Council for Appeals on February 26, 2016, but was dismissed on June 7, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 8, 10, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 4, 5, and 7 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case was unlawful, since the lawsuit of this case was filed without going through the review and decision of the appeals review committee, which is the procedure of the previous trial as prescribed by the State Public Officials Act.

In contrast, whether the instant lawsuit satisfies the requirements of the principle of pre-determination of administrative appeals is determined based on the time of closing argument at the fact-finding court (Supreme Court Decision 87Nu176 Decided September 22, 1987), and the Plaintiff at the time of filing the instant lawsuit.