당연퇴직처분취소
1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part that seeks revocation of the disposition shall be dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's remaining claims.
1. Basic facts
A. On February 9, 201, while working as a local public official in the Daegu District Court Kimcheon-si B, the Plaintiff was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years, a surcharge of 46,92,893 won (201, a surcharge of 2010, a surcharge of 46,92, and a surcharge of 893) for one year, to a third party, and the Plaintiff appealed from the Daegu District Court on February 23, 2012, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years, a surcharge of 42,52,113 won (20, a surcharge of 201, a surcharge of 42,52, and a surcharge of 113 won). In other words, the Plaintiff appealed on October 15, 2014, and the remaining appeal became final and conclusive as imprisonment with prison labor and a suspended sentence of two years was dismissed.
(2012Do3691). (b)
On October 24, 2014, the Defendant issued to the Plaintiff a notice of “an order of personnel appointment of a local public official” (hereinafter “instant notice”) stating that the Plaintiff shall be retired from office as of October 15, 2014 pursuant to Article 61 of the Local Public Officials Act.
[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Article 61 of the Local Public Officials Act provides that a public official who is sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment shall automatically retire without any separate remedy procedures, thereby infringing upon the constitutional right to attend a public office and violating the spirit of separation of powers.
The ipso facto retirement disposition against the plaintiff is made in accordance with the unconstitutional law, so it should be revoked illegally, and the plaintiff still is a local public official.
3. Determination as to the defense prior to the merits of the part seeking revocation of the lawsuit in this case
A. The defendant's ipso facto retirement system is a system that naturally retires pursuant to the provisions of law when a legal ground for disqualification occurs, and the notification of this case is merely informing the plaintiff that the plaintiff retired ipso facto, and thus does not constitute a disposition that becomes the object of administrative litigation. Thus, the plaintiff's lawsuit seeking revocation of ipso facto retirement