불합격처분취소
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On February 20, 2019, the Defendant publicly announced the “the examination for appointment of local public officials of Gwangju Metropolitan City in 2019” (hereinafter “instant examination”). The Plaintiff applied for B during the said examination for appointment.
B. During the instant examination, the number of persons to be selected shall be one, and the number of persons to be selected shall be at least 40% of the full scores of each subject, and the interview shall be at least 30% of the full scores of each subject, and the number of persons who obtain at least 60% of the total scores shall be publicly announced in order of the highest score.
C. The Plaintiff received an average of 90 points (a total of 180 points) with another applicant in the written examination, but the other applicant in the interview showed an “outstanding” level, while the Plaintiff received an “outstanding” level, and disposed of the final failure in the instant examination upon receiving an “ordinary” level.
hereinafter referred to as "outstanding disposition of this case"
(ii) [based on recognition] unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 6 (including paper numbers, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings;
2. According to Article 51 of the Decree on the Appointment of Local Public Officials, the Defendant: (a) requested the interview members to have a difference in the results of the interview by exercising unfair influence on the interview members due to reasons not prescribed by the relevant statutes, such as the following: (b) the interview members who have passed the written examination are required to be differentiated from the interview points of two successful applicants; and (c) the interview members are required to select only one person.
In addition, the interview committee had the interview committee members adjust the results of the interview evaluation before the announcement of the final successful candidate.
The Defendant’s above act lacks objectivity and rationality, and the instant failure disposition is an illegal disposition that deviates from and abused discretion.
3. Attached statements to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;
4. The evidence presented by the Plaintiff is admissible in light of the following circumstances, which can be seen if the testimony of the witness C and the purport of the entire pleading is added to the testimony of the witness C.