감봉처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff was appointed as a police officer on March 10, 2006, and was promoted to the Superintendent on July 1, 2008, and was on duty in the Busan Western Police Station B district from July 26, 2012.
B. On December 3, 2012, the 2nd Provincial Police Agency Disciplinary Committee decided to dismiss the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 78(1)1 and 3 of the State Public Officials Act on the ground that the Plaintiff violated Article 56 (Duty of Fidelity) and Article 63 (1) 1 and 3 of the same Act as the grounds for the following disciplinary action, and the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff on December 5, 2012.
[1] The Plaintiff, a police officer with his/her spouse, has served as a police officer for the two-day trip from September 11, 2012 to March 2012, 2012 (hereinafter “instant one-day trip”). On July 2012, the Plaintiff, a police officer with his/her spouse, was able to play a boat as prescribed by the Gancheon-si, Gyeonggi-do, Gancheon-si, Gyeonggi-do, for the two-day trip from September 11, 2012 to the following day (hereinafter “instant one-day trip”).
A) A person, who divers together at the Fudio of the “Empill” located in Gangwon-do (257 mobile phone calls from May 1, 2012 to October 15, 2012) provided the cause of home blasting, which would have had his/her spouse settled for three months after D applied for divorce on October 2, 2012 (hereinafter “Disciplinary Reason 1”).
(2) On October 15, 2012, D: (a) the Plaintiff was willing to commit suicide with himself/herself; (b) the Plaintiff filed 112 reports; and (c) the police officer, who received the report, failed to inform the police officer of his/her identity and accurate details due to fear that his/her sexual intercourse is evident at the time of the report, and thus failed to inform him/her of his/her identity and accurate details; and (d) the police officer who received the report was mobilized for unnecessary search for about two hours (hereinafter “Disciplinary Reason 2”).
C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff requested the appeals review committee of the Ministry of Public Administration and Security to revoke or reduce the above disciplinary action, and the said committee is all on April 19, 2013.