정직처분취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the part added or used as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of
(1) In addition, the first instance court’s decision that rejected the Plaintiff’s claim is justifiable even if the Plaintiff’s claim was examined in both the evidence submitted to the first instance court and this court, and the grounds alleged by the Plaintiff in the appeal do not differ significantly from the contents alleged by the Plaintiff in the first instance court. The second instance court’s decision added “the Plaintiff’s act of violating traffic regulations on 4 occasions in total as follows” to “the instant traffic offense.”
We add the following facts: “No dispute exists between the third and third parties of the first instance judgment”; “No dispute exists between Gap’s evidence 1 through 5; Gap’s evidence 10, 11, and 13 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply); and the purport of the whole pleadings.”
Each "B hospital" in the 3th, 5, 6, and 9 of the judgment of the first instance court shall be conducted by all "B hospital of this case".
"It is difficult to see that the violation of the plaintiff is minor" from 5th to 4th of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be committed as follows.
The following contents are added between the 5th and 8th, the first instance court's ruling, "The public document's credit is considerably damaged, and the degree of the misconduct is not less severe, and the public service needs to be strictly responsible for the disciplinary action against the above misconduct."
In regard to this, the Plaintiff separately determines the criteria for disciplinary action depending on the severity of intention or negligence, but in the case of “preparation and exercise of false documents” applied to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff is intentional or negligent.