해임처분취소
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. In the event that the grounds alleged by the plaintiff in the trial while filing an appeal by the court of first instance are not significantly different from the contents alleged by the plaintiff in the court of first instance, the judgment of the court of first instance rejecting the plaintiff's assertion even if both the evidence submitted by the court of first instance and the statement of the evidence No. 9 submitted by the court of first instance are examined along with
Therefore, the reasoning of this court’s explanation is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the plaintiff added a judgment on the assertion that the plaintiff emphasizes again by this court. Thus, this court shall accept it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion of the trial
A. The summary of the argument 1) The case in which the Disciplinary Reason C of the 1st Disciplinary Reason C filed a complaint against G in fraud was judged as a civil case, and thus, the case was likely to be handled without suspicion, and the plaintiff merely gives practical advice about how to reach an agreement if it is intended to receive payment, not to punish C.
Although the plaintiff did not accept the agreement and rather explained that C does not have any problem to intervene in the plaintiff, C wants to receive a inventory after withdrawal of the complaint, and C requests the plaintiff to receive a inventory if he/she wishes to receive the petition while filing a petition against the plaintiff who did not receive it from the investigation division.
C intentionally criticizes the plaintiff by asserting that the reason for the truth-finding is true, and the statement is not consistent. The J also stated that the plaintiff was transferred from G, and there are many parts that are inconsistent with the fact, so the credibility of the statement is not high.
Even with G, at least the Plaintiff actively intended or demanded entertainment, and the Plaintiff refused to pay entertainment. However, the Plaintiff’s refusal to pay entertainment, which led to the Plaintiff having received a meal entertainment by first leaving the settlement of G, and the Plaintiff’s contact with the meal.