파면처분취소
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff was appointed as a class B employee on June 22, 1992 and promoted to Grade 5 on June 1, 2004. From March 16, 2009 to June 28, 2010, the Plaintiff served as the actual cooperation officer, and from June 29, 201 to July 14, 201, as the head of the actual team.
B. On October 18, 2013, the Defendant requested the Disciplinary Committee to take disciplinary action and disciplinary additional charges against the Plaintiff. On the ground that the High Disciplinary Committee (hereinafter “Disciplinary Action”) committed a violation of Article 11 (Prohibition of Abuse of Authority), Article 129 (Bribery of Authority), Article 44 (Prohibition of Obstruction of Examination or Appointment), Articles 56 (Duty of Integrity), 63 (Duty of Integrity), 3 (Duty of Integrity of Integrity), 14 (2) (Restrictions on Receiving Money and Valuables), and Article 18 (2) (hereinafter “the Disciplinary Action”), the Defendant’s dismissal and removal of the Plaintiff from office against the President on the ground that the Plaintiff violated Article 12 (Prohibition of Abuse of Authority), Article 129 (Bribery), Article 56 (State Public Officials Act, Article 61 (Duty of Integrity of Good Faith), Article 63 (Duty of Integrity), Article 14 (2) (Restriction on Receiving Money and Valuables), and Article 18 (2) (Restriction on Receiving Money and Valuables) of the National Public Officials Act.
The Defendant issued a disposition imposing a surcharge of three million won against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition of removal”) and the instant surcharge, and collectively, “each of the instant dispositions”.
C. The Plaintiff filed an appeal review with the appeals review committee on each of the instant dispositions, but was dismissed on June 3, 2014.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1 is based on a survey conducted on the premise of disciplinary action against the plaintiff.