파면처분취소
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 September 6, 1986, and was promoted to the Inspector on September 1, 2007, and served in B police station from March 5, 2008.
B. On August 23, 2011, the General Disciplinary Committee of Police Officers B, on the ground that the Plaintiff violated Articles 56 (Duty of Good Faith), 57 (Duty of Good Faith), and 63 (Duty of Maintenance of Dignity) of the State Public Officials Act by committing an act of misconduct as stated in the annexed Disciplinary Reason, made a decision of removal from office pursuant to each subparagraph of Article 78 (1) of the State Public Officials Act against the Plaintiff. On August 24, 2011, the Defendant issued a disposition to dismiss the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal review with the appeals review committee, but the appeals review committee dismissed the said appeal review request on January 16, 2012.
[Reasons for Recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 53, Eul evidence No. 52 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The person having authority over disciplinary action against the plaintiff is the chief of B police station, so disciplinary action against the plaintiff shall be conducted in accordance with the procedure for disciplinary action by a general disciplinary committee of police officers at B police station according to the request for disciplinary action by B chief of B police station, but the defendant, not the chief of B chief of police station, requested the above general
B) At the hearing and inspection office of the Gwangju Metropolitan Police Agency, the chief of the B police station made illegal instructions, such as demanding the Plaintiff to take disciplinary action against the Plaintiff and report. C) The chief of the B police station must refer the case to the Disciplinary Committee after sufficiently investigating the facts constituting grounds for disciplinary action pursuant to Article 9(3) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Disciplinary Decree (amended by Presidential Decree No. 23554, Jan. 26, 2012; hereinafter the same). However, without any particular investigation, the request for disciplinary action was made according to Article 13 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Disciplinary Decree of the Police Officers.