해임처분취소
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On April 1, 1994, the Plaintiff was appointed as a teacher of Asan Middle School, and the Plaintiff passed an open screening process conducted on December 19, 201 from the 23th educational specialist, and served as a C Education Institute teacher from September 1, 2012.
B. The Plaintiff applied for the general screening examination of the Seoul Special Department of Education in the 2012-year 2012.
The plaintiff shall not apply for an examination by improper means when he/she applies for the examination.
Nevertheless, around November 201, the Plaintiff received the issue of questions to be drawn up for the examination from D working in the Cheongnam-do Office of Education prior to the evaluation, and applied for the examination and passed the final examination.
After that, around February 27, 2012, the Plaintiff provided money and valuables of KRW 20 million as a consideration for receiving the screening examination problem after drinking E.
On June 3, 2013, the Defendant requested the General Disciplinary Committee of the public educational officials Chungcheongnam-do to adopt a resolution on the imposition of heavy disciplinary and disciplinary additional charges against the Plaintiff. On July 26, 2013, the Defendant issued a dismissal disposition and imposition of additional charges (20 million won) under Articles 69 and 69-2 of the Local Public Officials Act against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff committed any of the following misconducts (hereinafter “instant misconduct”) and the Plaintiff violated Articles 48, 53, and 55 of the Local Public Officials Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
C. On August 22, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an appeal review seeking the revocation of the instant disposition with respect to the Plaintiff’s appeal petition review to the Teachers’ Appeal Committee. On November 18, 2013, the Teachers’ Appeal Committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on the ground that “the grounds for disciplinary action against the Plaintiff are recognized, and the disciplinary action is appropriate.”
【Ground of recognition’s absence of dispute, Gap’s 1, 2, and 5 evidence, and Eul’s 5 (including each number, if any).