견책처분취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for dismissal or addition as follows. Thus, this is cited as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. A among the reasons for the judgment of the first instance.
2) Paragraph (1) (Articles 3 through 8) is as follows. 2) Even if there exist grounds for disciplinary action, the instant disposition was abused or abused by discretionary authority in light of the following circumstances. (A) Even if it was determined that it is reasonable to directly investigate the Plaintiff’s misconduct, not disciplinary action, but a caution and warning against the Plaintiff, the Defendant made a request for disciplinary action against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff did not cooperate with the investigation, and the Defendant accepted a request for disciplinary action by the General Public Educational Officials Disciplinary Committee and rendered the instant disposition against the Plaintiff.
B) The 100,000 won, which the Plaintiff provided to D, is only 1/10 of the 100,000 won, which is the basis for the request for a disciplinary decision. The above 100,000 won is too harsh that the part actually shared by the Plaintiff due to the relationship between five members of the "School D D," which is the money paid by the membership fee jointly prepared by the five members of the "School D," is too harsh. (C) The assistant principal, teachers, and teachers of the C Elementary School, who provided money and valuables in relation to the illegal act of receiving money and valuables at C Elementary School D, were subject to the instant disposition only by the Plaintiff without any disciplinary action, and thus the instant disposition goes against the equity. Considering the circumstances that the Plaintiff paid KRW 100,00 to D, the administrative purpose can be sufficiently achieved solely with the Plaintiff’s caution or warning, while the Plaintiff’s disadvantage suffered by the instant disposition is excessively excessive.