1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The following facts are apparent in the records of the judgment subject to a retrial:

[Grounds for disciplinary action] ① The Plaintiff provided the cause for a civil petition wherein E could not be misunderstanding the claim for compensation for the purchase of the instant land by failing to specifically respond to whether the Plaintiff is actually able to purchase the instant land at B in relation to the purchase claim of 1,249 square meters prior to F, G 1,785.1 square meters prior to G, and H 462.9 square meters prior to H (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant real estate”).

② The Plaintiff violated Article 15(1) of the Civil Petitions Treatment Act by failing to reply to the civil petitioner, which constitutes the result of handling civil petitions referred to by the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission.

③ The Plaintiff violated Article 3 of the Official Information Disclosure Act by providing E with a copy of the instant public inquiry without due process under the Official Information Disclosure Act.

④ The content of the instant official document constitutes “general affairs for the creation of parks and green areas,” and thus, constitutes a discretionary decision pursuant to the attached Table 1 of Article 4(1) of the Rules on the Transitional Measures for the Delegation of Administrative Affairs, but the Plaintiff violated the Rules on the Transitional Measures for the Delegation of Administrative Affairs without approval from the person with the discretionary authority.

On November 29, 2012, the defendant requested a minor disciplinary decision to the B City Personnel Committee in accordance with Article 49 of the Local Public Officials Act and the Rules concerning the Local Public Officials' Disciplinary Action.

B On December 13, 2012, the City Personnel Committee passed a resolution on the reduction of salary for one month on the ground that the Plaintiff violated the duty of good faith under Article 48 of the Local Public Officials Act on the grounds of the following [the grounds for disciplinary action].

Accordingly, on December 19, 2012, the defendant issued a disposition of reduction of salary for one month to the plaintiff.

(hereinafter referred to as "the instant disciplinary action". (b)

On January 7, 2013, the Plaintiff was dissatisfied with the instant disciplinary action and filed an appeal on personnel affairs with the competent local appeals review committee, Chungcheongnam-do. However, on February 13, 2013, the Plaintiff was dismissed.

C. The plaintiff.