1. The part of the instant lawsuit, excluding the primary claim against the order of leave of absence dated September 22, 2014, is all the remainder of the claim.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 2005, the Plaintiff was appointed as a senior officer in the around 1993, and was promoted to the Major Order around December 2005. At the 2014 Review Committee for the Selection of Officers Eligible for First Lieutenant, the Plaintiff was selected as a senior officer and was registered and publicly announced as a senior officer in the list of prospective candidates for Second Lieutenant in the year 2014.

B. After that, the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Army Headquarters conducted an investigation against the Plaintiff on the grounds of abuse of authority against the subordinate military personnel of the past. As a result of the investigation, the Plaintiff was acknowledged to have been suspected of preparing false official documents, and prosecuted the Plaintiff at the General Military Court of the Army Headquarters on September 16, 2014, and requested the Defendant (the Army Headquarters Personnel Commander) to take a leave of absence against the Plaintiff on the same day.

C. Accordingly, on September 19, 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the grounds for and details of the disposition of leave of absence and the opportunity to present opinions, and received an individual opinion from the Plaintiff on September 22, 2014.

On September 22, 2014, the Defendant issued a leave order to the Plaintiff on September 24, 2014.

(hereinafter “instant temporary retirement order”). D.

On April 16, 2015, the Plaintiff was served with the notice of defeat of promotion (hereinafter “instant 1 Nakdongcheon”) by the Defendant to the effect that the Plaintiff was removed from the list of candidates for promotion on July 8, 2014 on the grounds of “the two-month disposition of suspension from office, such as violation of gender military discipline, etc. (see, e.g., July 8, 2014) and the prosecution of military court (see, e.g., abuse of authority and abuse of authority).”

E. On the other hand, on April 23, 2015, the Plaintiff prepared an application for a reinstatement order and sent it to the Defendant by mail. On June 11, 2015, the said application was received in the Office of the Army Headquarters Staff.

(hereinafter “Application for Order of Reinstatement”). The Defendant did not answer the above application.

F. Thereafter, the Plaintiff is against the Defendant on September 24, 2015.

For the same reason, the plaintiff was removed from the list of prospective candidates for promotion on September 22, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the "disposition 2") notification.