beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.03.21 2016구합8482

정직처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. After having been appointed as the Army officer on March 1, 2007, the Plaintiff served as the third volunteer soldier in the Army from November 12, 2013 to October 6, 2015, the third volunteer soldier in the Army as the first volunteer in the 23th rank.

B. On December 4, 2015, the Defendant issued a three-month disciplinary measure (hereinafter “instant disciplinary measure”) against the Plaintiff under suspension from office pursuant to Article 56 of the former Military Personnel Management Act (amended by Act No. 13505, Sept. 1, 2015; hereinafter the same) on the ground that the Plaintiff violated his/her duty to maintain dignity, such as the grounds for disciplinary action listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant disciplinary measure”).

C. The Plaintiff appealed against the instant disciplinary action, but on May 12, 2016, the 3Y rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s appeal.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disciplinary action is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s act of the instant disciplinary cause is within the scope of the purpose of establishing discipline and discipline among the private soldiers, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff violated his duty to maintain dignity as provided in Article 56 of the former Military Personnel Management Act, even if all of the disciplinary causes of the instant disciplinary action against the unfair Plaintiff are acknowledged, in light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff did not have been subject to disciplinary action during his military service period; (b) the victims and the captain wanted to take the action against the Plaintiff; and (c) the disadvantage that the Plaintiff would be subject to the instant disciplinary action is too large, in light of the fact that the instant disciplinary action was abused or abused by violating the principle of proportionality.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. Article 47-2 of the former Military Personnel Management Act on the existence of grounds for disciplinary action 1, and “military personnel.”