2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On May 25, 2014 and May 26, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an accusation with the Defendant that “A public official of the B Office of Education, C, D, and E, who is a public official of the B Office of Education, sent the Kakao Stockholm and text messages to public officials of other offices of education, and thus, constitutes a violation of the Public Official Election Act, such as sending them to other offices of education.”

B. The Defendant filed an accusation against C, D, and E with the original district prosecutor’s office, and the original district prosecutor’s office which investigated the instant case was prosecuted on September 2, 2014 under the Local Education Autonomy Act, including C, D, and E.

C. On August 21, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the payment of KRW 300 million for the report of election crimes on the ground that his/her own information was the opportunity for the Defendant to make a decision, and that the Defendant applied for the payment of KRW 300 million for the report of election crimes. Accordingly, on September 17, 2014, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition rejecting the application for the payment of the said reward on the ground that “the payment of the reward is restricted pursuant to Article 262-3 of the Public Official Election Act, Articles 143-4 and 143-6 of the Rules on the Management of Public Officials Election, and

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 5 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff reported the change of election by public officials C, etc. to the defendant, and the defendant accuseded the defendant to the prosecutor's office and prosecuted C, etc. Thus, the defendant shall pay the plaintiff a monetary reward in accordance with the guidelines for payment of monetary rewards to the reporter, such as Article 262-3 of the Public Official Election Act, Articles 143-4 and 143

Nevertheless, since the defendant refused to apply for the payment of the plaintiff's monetary reward without justifiable grounds, the disposition of this case is unlawful in violation of the above provisions.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

(c).