해임처분취소
1. Revocation of the judgment of the first instance, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation as to this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) the pertinent part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of the pertinent part (including first 2 to 8, second 2, and second 6). As such, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, the main text
2. Determination
A. Whether a disciplinary measure should be taken against a person subject to disciplinary action is at the discretion of the person having authority to take the disciplinary measure. However, the disciplinary measure is unlawful only when the person having authority to take the disciplinary measure, as the exercise of discretionary authority, has considerably lost validity under the social norms, and it is recognized that the person having authority to take the disciplinary measure has abused the discretionary authority to the person having authority to take the disciplinary measure. In order for a disciplinary measure to have remarkably lost validity under the social norms, the disciplinary measure should be determined by taking into account various factors, such as the content and nature of the misconduct causing the disciplinary measure, administrative purpose to be achieved by the disciplinary measure, criteria for the determination of the disciplinary measure, etc., and where
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 95Nu18727, Apr. 26, 1996; 201Du29540, Feb. 27, 2014). (B)
Examining the following circumstances revealed in the process of dispositions or facts of recognition and the relevant provisions of the Military Personnel Management Act, etc. in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant disposition was abused or abused discretion is difficult even if considering favorable circumstances to the Plaintiff known in the above facts of recognition.
1. As military personnel are assigned a duty to guarantee national security and defend national land, which is a mission of the national armed forces, and to prevent the protection of people's lives, bodies, and property, more strict principles and regulations than other public officials shall apply.
In particular, the commander of the military unit performs his duties.