Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. On January 14, 2019, the Plaintiff was appointed as a local administrative library, and served in the two-way viewing housing since that time.

B. On March 25, 2019, the Seoul Dobong Police Station: (a) “A person subject to registration of personal information based on the final judgment of the crime of indecent act by compulsion, but did not submit basic personal information to the head of the competent police office within 30 days from the date the judgment became final and conclusive without justifiable grounds (hereinafter “suspected facts”) was indicted against a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Confidentiality, etc.) and sent the case to the Seoul Northern District Prosecutors’ Office. Around that time, the Defendant notified by the Seoul Dobong Police Station, requested the Gyeonggi Provincial Personnel Committee to make a heavy disciplinary resolution against the Plaintiff on March 28, 2019.

C. On April 24, 2019, the Gyeonggi-do Personnel Committee: (a) recognized the Plaintiff’s suspected facts of suspicion; and (b) decided on January 1 of the salary reduction on the ground that this constitutes a violation of the duty to maintain dignity under the Local Public Officials Act.

On May 8, 2019, the Defendant, according to the above disciplinary resolution, took a disciplinary measure for one month of salary reduction against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant measure”).

E. On June 10, 2019, the Plaintiff filed a petition review with the Gyeonggi-do Review Committee, but the Gyeonggi-do Review Committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s petition review on July 1, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including each number, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff had excellent performance, such as receiving a large number of certificates of listing in the education of new public officials, and the Defendant abused the Plaintiff’s right to withdraw from the probation on August 15, 2019, contrary to the Plaintiff’s motive, the Plaintiff abused his/her right to release him/her from the probation.

The plaintiff shall submit basic personal information due to such apprehensions of status and stress arising from work adaptation.