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 teacher on July 4, 1982, and from March 1, 2013 to March 1, 2013, the Plaintiff is in charge of penting supervision at B High School.

B. At around 13:30 on April 22, 2015, the middle and long-ranged students C and penting students D suffered bodily injury, such as c’s bones, bones, etc. which require approximately three weeks of treatment.

Although the Plaintiff was aware of the aforementioned facts from E, a former-long-long-long-Term E, a former-long-long-Term E, the Plaintiff sought to resolve it by immediately reporting it to the organization in exclusive charge of school violence, not dealing with it in accordance with the school violence processing process, and by closing contact with the students concerned.

C. The defendant Na.

On July 30, 2015, the act described in the paragraph was defined as a disciplinary cause. On July 30, 2015, the Office of Education of Gyeonggi-do requested a general disciplinary committee for disciplinary action against the plaintiff, and the disciplinary committee passed a resolution on August 19, 2015.

On August 24, 2015, the Defendant issued a reprimand against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Article 78(1)2 and 3 of the State Public Officials Act on the ground that the Plaintiff violated the School Violence Prevention and Countermeasures Act and Articles 56 (Duty of Fidelity) and 63 (Duty of Fidelity Maintenance) of the State Public Officials Act in accordance with the resolution of the General Disciplinary Committee of the Office of Education of the Superior-do.

E. Although the Plaintiff filed an appeal review, the teachers’ appeals review committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s request on November 25, 2015.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff came to know of the student C and D’s fightings more than E, and did not report the student’s fightings upon the student’s request or considering the student’s future, and during that period, the instant disposition was abused or abused the Plaintiff’s public services regarding penting education.

(b).