2014Guhap1984 Revocation of Disposition of revocation of dismissal

person.

Law Firm Taen, Attorney Park Tae-ok

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 10 others

Governor of Jeollabuk-do

Litigation Performers Kim Jong-dae, Park Jong-hee

June 10, 2015

June 24, 2015

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The defendant's dismissal of the plaintiff on March 20, 2014 against the plaintiff shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 22, 2007, the Plaintiff was appointed as the 00 official gazette for Vice-Gun, Chungcheongnam-do on May 4, 2012, and was transferred to Jeollabuk-do on May 4, 2012, and worked for 00 and 000 in Jeollabuk-do.

B. On January 14, 2014, the Defendant requested the Governor to take a disciplinary action against the Plaintiff. On March 6, 2014, the Governor of the Jeollabuk-do Personnel Committee recognized all the grounds for disciplinary action and decided to take disciplinary action against dismissal. On March 19, 2014, the Defendant issued a disciplinary action against the Plaintiff for the following reasons (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

A person shall be appointed.

C. On March 31, 2014, the Plaintiff appealed and filed a petition review with the Deliberative Committee on Local Appeals to the Province of Jeollabuk-do, but the said petition was dismissed on May 20, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, and Gap evidence Nos. 9, and the whole pleadings

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Although the Plaintiff committed an act that damages the dignity as a public official, in light of the following: (a) while under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant’s dismissal of the Plaintiff’s status as a public official was avoided and immediately ceased to commit an indecent act; (b) the victim and the victim were able to take the Defendant’s preference against the Plaintiff; (c) the Plaintiff received a large number of official commendation in good faith; (d) the Plaintiff received a large number of official commendation; (e) the dong public officials and her mother were the Plaintiff’s parents; (e) the Plaintiff’s parents were the Plaintiff’s parents; and (e) the Plaintiff’s loss of public official status would result in the Plaintiff’s loss; and (e) the instant disposition was unlawful since the Defendant’s dismissal of the Plaintiff’s status as a public official was excessively harsh and constitutes deviation or abuse of discretionary power.

(b) Relevant statutes;

As shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) Whether to take a disciplinary measure against a person subject to disciplinary action who is a public official is subject to the discretion of the person having authority to take the disciplinary measure, and a disciplinary measure taken by the person having authority to take the disciplinary measure is illegal only when it is deemed that the person has abused discretionary power because it substantially lacks validity under the social norms. In order to deem that a disciplinary measure against a public official has considerably lost validity under the social norms, the disciplinary measure should be determined that the content of the disciplinary measure is objectively unreasonable in light of various factors, such as the content and nature of the misconduct causing the disciplinary measure, administrative purpose to be achieved by the disciplinary measure, criteria for the determination of disciplinary measures, etc. according to the specific case (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Du29540, Feb. 27, 2014).

2) In light of the above legal principles, according to the health class, Gap evidence 2, No. 4-1 and No. 2 as to the instant disposition, on December 23, 2013, the plaintiff was subject to a disposition of suspension of indictment for the crime of attempted quasi-rape by committing the instant misconduct at the former District Prosecutors' Office. According to the decision of non-prosecution, it is recognized that the plaintiff is guilty of suspected facts, without the same power, and that the plaintiff was attempted to stop the crime with his mind because he did not cause substantial damage to the victim, in light of the fact that the suspension of the crime as seen above, the plaintiff was led to a confession of the crime with a depth, and that the victim was not punished, and that the victim's mother is also willing, and that the plaintiff and the plaintiff did not lose his status as a new citizen after being sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor by the former Prosecutors' Office, and that the decision of non-prosecution should be determined thoroughly as follows: 1) in light of the above fact that the plaintiff and the plaintiff did not lose his status.

However, in full view of the aforementioned facts and the purport of the entire arguments revealed in light of the circumstances revealed by the Plaintiff, even if considering various circumstances, such as the victim’s wife and the circumstance leading to the victim’s attempted stop, it cannot be deemed that the instant disposition was objectively and clearly unreasonable under the generally accepted social norms, thereby abusing discretion or deviating from its limitation, and thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

① Article 2(1) of the Rules on Disciplinary Action against Local Public Officials in Jeollabuk-do (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2888, Mar. 15, 2013) provides that "the Personnel Committee shall make a decision on a case in accordance with the disciplinary criteria set forth in attached Table 1 [Attachment 1] in consideration of the type of misconduct against a discipline accused person, the degree of misconduct, the degree of negligence, and the degree of public perception of his/her conduct of conduct and performance of his/her duties, and other circumstances." The criteria for the disciplinary action prescribed in [Attachment 1] include the criteria for the disciplinary action [Attachment 1] include the violation of the duty to maintain dignity, the dismissal of the case in which the degree of misconduct is serious, the degree of misconduct is serious, the degree of gross negligence, the degree of misconduct is serious, or the dismissal of the case in which the degree of misconduct is weak, and the dismissal of the case is determined within the scope of the disciplinary action set in this case.

② Article 4(1) of the Rules on Disciplinary Action as to the above Disciplinary Action may reduce disciplinary action according to the criteria for mitigation of disciplinary action under the Awards and Decorations Act in a case where a person for whom a disciplinary decision was requested has rendered a meritorious service corresponding to the meritorious service awarded an order or a medal under the Awards and Decorations Act (Attachment 3). However, the above provision provides that disciplinary action against a sexual crime under the Sexual Violence Prevention and Victims Protection Act shall not be mitigated. Thus, in taking a disciplinary action under the above disciplinary ground, the determination of disciplinary action against the Plaintiff does not seem to have abused discretionary power because the Defendant did not take into account the Plaintiff’s ordinary behavior, performance record, and merits.

③ Although the Plaintiff was suspended from indictment on the attempted quasi-rape, the Plaintiff’s misconduct was committed by committing rape. However, it is necessary to strictly regulate the Plaintiff’s misconduct in the public interest because it is necessary to enhance the discipline of the public service society by undergoing strict disciplinary action. The Plaintiff’s misconduct was committed by committing rape to the taxi with the victim who first see at night while staying in the taxi, and attempted to rape with the victim who was unable to resist. This is more serious to the position of the public official.

④ Even if the Plaintiff agreed with the victim, it seems that there is no direct influence on the Plaintiff’s public official discipline and the recovery of trust of public officials.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Chang-chul

Judges Park Gyeong-ok

Judges Kang Jae-chul

Relevant statutes

▣ 지방공무원법

Article 55 (Duty to Maintain Dignity)

No public official shall perform any act detrimental to his/her dignity.

Article 69 (Grounds for Disciplinary Action)

(1) Where a public official falls under any of the following subparagraphs, a disciplinary resolution shall be requested and a disciplinary resolution shall be decided:

The disciplinary action shall be taken according to the division.

1. When he/she violates this Act or an order issued under this Act or Municipal Ordinances or Municipal Rules of a local government;

2. Violation of official duties (including duties imposed in connection with the status of public officials by other Acts and subordinate statutes);

when he/she neglects or neglects his/her duties;

3. When he commits an act detrimental to his dignity as a public official.

▣ 지방공무원 징계 및 소청 규정

Article 2 (Request for Disciplinary Decision, etc.)

(1) An appointing authority under Article 7 (1) of the Act shall be public officials under his/her jurisdiction (autonomous Gus established by a personnel committee.

In cases of the head of the Gu and the heads of affiliated agencies, any of the following public officials:

only) Recognition that there is a ground falling under Articles 69(1) and 69bis(1) and (2) of this Act

In the event of a disciplinary action, etc., the Committee having jurisdiction over the relevant disciplinary action, etc. shall without delay impose disciplinary action surcharges.

A resolution (hereinafter referred to as "resolution resolution, etc.") shall be requested.

1. Public officials of Grade VI or lower, etc.;

2. Public officials in a fixed term position (in cases of public officials in a fixed term position, public officials appointed to open positions shall be excluded);

(2)

1. In cases of an investigation conducted by the Board of Audit and Inspection, a request for disciplinary action against a public official or a request for the imposition of surcharges for disciplinary action:

and records of investigation, such as written answers to, and confirmations of, suspects and relevant persons;

2. In cases of an investigation conducted by an investigative agency, a notice of the result of the disposition of a crime committed by a public official, indictment, suspect, or official;

Investigative records, such as the examination records and written statements concerning craftsmen and related witnesses;

3. In cases of an investigation conducted by other agencies, a notice of suspicion, such as disciplinary action, and the facts of suspicion.

relevant data evidencing that the data

(3) The head of the agency notified of the reason for disciplinary action, etc. under paragraph (2) shall be subject to such notification within one month.

A request for disciplinary resolution, etc. on the relevant public official shall be made to the committee.

(4) The head of the agency requesting a disciplinary resolution, etc. under paragraph (3) shall notify the reasons for disciplinary action, etc.

The head of the agency shall notify the results of processing the relevant case.

(5) and (5)

(6) Where a resolution on disciplinary action, etc. is requested under paragraphs (1) and (3), a full investigation of the grounds for disciplinary action, etc.

shall be submitted to the competent commission along with the following relevant data necessary for certification after

Article 32 (1) and (2) of the Board of Audit and Inspection Act shall be separately requested for severe disciplinary action or minor disciplinary action: Provided, That Article 32 (1) and (3)

10) Summary of disciplinary action by the Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection specified in Article 70 of the Act;

The foregoing shall not apply where the Gu has made a Gu.

1. A request for resolution on disciplinary action against a public official or the imposition of disciplinary surcharges in attached Form 1 (hereinafter referred to as "request for resolution on disciplinary action");

Gu letter "D"

2. A copy of the personnel records card of public officials.

3. A written confirmation in attached Form 1-2;

4. Relevant evidential data, such as official documents that may prove the facts of suspicion;

5. Records of investigation or records of investigation regarding the details of suspicion;

6. Data on measures taken against relevant persons and evidence thereof;

7. Extraction of relevant laws and regulations, instruction documents, etc.;

(7) A person who requests a disciplinary resolution, etc. shall simultaneously be requested to make a disciplinary resolution, etc. under paragraph (6).

B/L sent to the suspect subject to disciplinary action, etc., and the receipt of a copy of the request for disciplinary action, etc. by the suspect subject to disciplinary action

rejection, a written notice shall be given to the competent commission along with the documents proving such fact.

of this section.

▣ 전라북도 지방공무원 징계양정에 관한 규칙 ( 2013 . 3 . 15 . 규칙 제2888호로 개정된 것 )

Article 2 (Criteria for Disciplinary Action or Disciplinary Additional Charges)

(1) The personnel committee shall adopt a type of misconduct against a person suspected of disciplinary action or disciplinary additional charges (hereinafter referred to as "measures, etc.");

The degree of misconduct, the degree of negligence, and the degree of public penure, work performance, and other circumstances, etc.

In consideration of the disciplinary standards in attached Table 1, the disciplinary standards in attached Table 1-2, and disciplinary actions in attached Table 1-3;

shall resolve the case in accordance with the guidelines for the imposition of the gold.

(2) When the personnel committee makes a resolution on a disciplinary case, such as disciplinary action, the public performance in official duties shall be conducted by causing irregularities and irregularities.

Money and valuables related to duties shall be maintained in good faith, realizing and establishing a clean public service society, and giving and receiving money and valuables related to such duties.

Cheating in drinking driving cases and sexual traffic under the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, Etc.;

must be responsible.

(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), any of the following misconducts, the degree of which is weak and due to negligence, shall be classified as follows:

In cases falling under subparagraph (hereinafter referred to as "resolution, etc.") a resolution on disciplinary action or a surcharge (hereinafter referred to as "resolution, etc.")

section 23 of this title.

1. To achieve the purpose of legislation of policies or related Acts and subordinate statutes which are national interest and benefit in the lives of the people;

to establish and implement essential policies, etc., or to achieve the objectives of the policy, the processing of affairs;

In the course of faithfully and actively managing affairs, such as improving the tea method in a creative manner;

if it is deemed to be

2. Posive action in order to prevent any serious damage to the national interest and people's lives, which may be predicted;

under the circumstances at the time of the establishment and enforcement of the policies, or out of such circumstances, arising in the course of the establishment and enforcement of the policies;

It is extremely difficult to expect that a person will be legally treated in light of the social norms of the State.

case.

[Attachment 1]

Warrant 2 (Related to Article 2)

Article 4 (Reduction of Disciplinary Action)

(1) The Personnel Committee shall, where a person for whom a resolution on disciplinary action is requested has rendered distinguished service falling under any of the following subparagraphs:

Disciplinary action may be mitigated according to the criteria for mitigation of disciplinary action pursuant to the attached Table 3: Provided, That the relevant public official shall take disciplinary action.

(2) If there is a warning under these Rules, prior to the disciplinary action or warning action

The grounds for disciplinary action under Article 73-2 (1) of the Local Public Officials Act shall be excluded from the meritorious services subject to small reduction.

Act on the Prevention of Sexual Violence and Protection of Victims, etc.

Sexual crimes under the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic and sexual traffic under the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic;

shall not be mitigated for any disciplinary action.

1. A meritorious service awarded any decoration or medal under the Awards and Decorations Act;

2. Public services awarded official commendation by the Prime Minister or more in accordance with the Government Commendation Regulations: Provided, That at the time of the misconduct, Grade VI or lower at the time of the misconduct;

Public officials, researchers, instructors, and public officials in technical service shall be the head of the central administrative agency (the head of an agency equivalent to Vice Minister);

(including) an award received by the Special Metropolitan City Mayor, Metropolitan City Mayor, or Do Governor or higher;

3. Public officials selected as exemplary public officials pursuant to the exemplary public officials;

4. Public services rendered to him/her on official duty;

(2) The personnel committee shall negligence in the course of faithfully and actively performing affairs for which a disciplinary resolution is required.

Where it is deemed that a disciplinary action has occurred, the standards for mitigation of disciplinary action in attached Table 3 shall be taken into consideration in consideration of the circumstances.

the disciplinary action may be mitigated. The end shall be