1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On July 6, 1992, the Plaintiff was newly appointed as an agricultural researcher to the Testing Bureau for Agricultural Community Development Promotion B, and served as a local agricultural researcher at the Agricultural Technology Institute B until now.

B. On May 10, 2013, a senior judicial police officer of the Jeju Police Station in charge of notification of the commencement of an investigation by an investigative agency and notification of the result of a disposition, notified the Defendant of the commencement of an investigation into a public official’s crime on May 3, 2013 regarding the Plaintiff’s embezzlement. On June 5, 2013, the chief prosecutor of the Gwangju District Public Prosecutor’s Office issued the Defendant a notice of the result of the disposition of a public official’s crime of preparing false public documents, uttering false public documents, and suspension of indictment on May 28, 2013 against the Plaintiff.

C. On September 24, 2013, after receiving notice of the result of the public official crime disposition from the head of the Gwangju District Public Prosecutor’s Office, the Defendant rendered a decision to revoke the previous disposition on the ground that the Plaintiff was subject to a reprimand and a disposition imposing a surcharge of KRW 1,200,00 (hereinafter “previous disposition”) on September 24, 2013 (hereinafter “previous”), but the Plaintiff appealed against it and filed a petition review with the Local Appeals Commission, and the said appeals review committee on January 27, 2014, rendered a decision to revoke the previous disposition on the ground that “the Defendant did not send a written request for disciplinary decision to the Plaintiff, and there is a defect in the process of infringing the Plaintiff’s right of defense.”

On April 14, 2014, the second disciplinary measure against the Plaintiff, following the resolution of the B Personnel Committee, imposed a reprimand (hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”) and a surcharge (1,200,000 won) against the Plaintiff on April 15, 2014 on the ground that the following misconduct (hereinafter referred to as “instant misconduct”) committed by the Plaintiff constituted grounds for disciplinary action under Article 69(1) of the Local Public Officials Act by violating Articles 48 and 55 of the Local Public Officials Act.

The plaintiff on 192.