The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal are the judgment of the first instance.

1. The grounds for admitting the judgment of the court of first instance, which the Plaintiff asserted in the trial while filing an appeal, are not significantly different from the already asserted in the court of first instance. However, even if the Plaintiff considered both the allegations in the trial, it is deemed legitimate to recognize and determine the facts of first instance even in light of all the claims in the trial.

Therefore, the reasoning of this court concerning this case is that the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is stated, except for the addition of the judgment on the defendant's grounds for appeal as follows. Thus, this court cites it as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on the ground of appeal by the plaintiff

A. The Plaintiff’s ground of appeal reveals that the instant misconduct committed by the Plaintiff was committed by assaulting the victim, who is a member of a workplace with which the Plaintiff is a relative member, and is irrelevant to the police officer’s duties, and the victim expressed his intention not to punish the Plaintiff immediately after the instant assault case. The Plaintiff also delivered the victim’s intention to be seriously ill-feasible to the victim through his son to not cause any unnecessary misunderstanding and inconvenience to the victim; due to the instant demotion disposition, the Plaintiff’s order became issued to another police station; and the Plaintiff was not supported by his son and C; and there was no other disposition of reduction of salary or higher for the similar misconduct committed by the Plaintiff. In light of the fact that there was no other disposition of reduction of salary or higher for the similar misconduct, the instant disposition of demotion is unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretion in violation of the principle of proportionality or the principle of equality.

B. In light of the following facts and circumstances that can be acknowledged by adding the overall purport of the pleadings to the respective statements in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 1 through 6 of this case, even when considering all favorable circumstances alleged by the Plaintiff, the instant disposition constitutes a violation of the principle of proportionality and equality, or abuse of the power to leave the person having authority over disciplinary action, as it considerably lacks validity under the social norms.