beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.
Reasons
Details of the Review Decision
A. The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) employs 1,600 full-time workers as a corporation established under Article 3 of the Korea Rural Community Corporation and Farmland Management Fund Act.
Until July 17, 2015, the Plaintiff, as an employee who was employed by the intervenors on December 10, 2007, was in charge of the affairs such as “survey of the impact of groundwater (repair facilities to utilize groundwater)” and “disaster prevention and measurement projects” in the 2nd groundwater geological department affiliated with the Intervenor. The Plaintiff temporarily employed necessary human resources at the site to conduct a field investigation to perform his/her duties, and performed necessary personnel expenses, other expenses, etc.
B. From June 22, 2015 to July 17, 2015, the Board of Audit and Inspection conducted an audit on the overall status of the execution of personnel expenses for daily workers (the period subject to audit and inspection: from June 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013) and discovered the following Plaintiff’s misconduct, etc.
(2) The lower court determined that: (a) the lower court determined that: (b) the Plaintiff did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to the amount of KRW 11,280,00,000 in the form of personnel expenses; (c) paid KRW 14,320,00 to KRW 12,270 in the form of personnel expenses; and (d) paid KRW 14,320,000 in the form of his mother’s account; and (e) paid KRW 14,320,00 in the aggregate to the Plaintiff’s mother’s total amount of KRW 14,320,00 in the form of personnel expenses; and (e) paid KRW 12,270,00 in the amount of KRW 12,270 in the amount of false account to the Plaintiff; and (e) paid KRW 2,000 in the amount of KRW 2,00 in the amount of money to the Plaintiff’s mother’s account to the Plaintiff.
C. On August 2015, an auditor requested an investigative agency to investigate relevant persons, including the Plaintiff, on the basis of the aforementioned audit results, and on February 12, 2016, requested an intervenor to take disciplinary action against the relevant persons, including the removal of the Plaintiff.
Accordingly, the intervenor in this case on August 22, 2017.