2013Guhap262 Such revocation of disposition

Ri○○ (51***** 14*****)

Not more than the fluorite asbestos at Seosan

Not more than the Dong-dong, Seosan-si, Si, Do;

The Superintendent of the Provincial Office of Education;

Daejeon Central District Office of Education No. 234-ro 34, 234 (Cultural Dong 279-2) Chungcheongnam-do Office of Education

The litigation performer's inside, movement rules, yellowation, sacratization, sacratization

Law Firm Han-gu, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant

Attorney Park Jong-young, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellee, Park Byung-chul, Park Byung-kin, and Kim Dong-dong

May 22, 2013

June 28, 2013

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The defendant's demotion disposition against the plaintiff on July 30, 2012 is revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. Since the Plaintiff was appointed as a teacher of an elementary school on March 10, 1973, the Plaintiff promoted to the principal of the school on September 1, 2009, served as the principal of the elementary school, and from March 1, 2011, served as the principal of the Bhue Elementary School from March 1, 201.

B. On July 30, 2012, the Defendant entered into 100,000 won for 100 won for 200,000 won for 200,000 won for 10,000 won for 10,000 won for 200,000 won for 10,000 won for 20,000 won for 10,000 won for 20,000 won for 10,000 won for 20,000 won for 10,000,000 won for 20,000,000 won for 10,000,000,000 won for 20,000,000 won for 20,000,000 won for 1,000,000 won for 20,000 won for 1,000,000 won for 20,00 won for 1,00.

[Grounds for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 13, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the demotion of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The non-existence of grounds for disciplinary action

The grounds of disciplinary action of this case are different from facts or cannot be the grounds to justify the disposition of this case's demotion for the following reasons.

After the Plaintiff was appointed as the principal of Bright Elementary School, he planned a meal for operating members, parents, etc. in connection with the merger of schools. However, the members of the operating committee, parents, etc. did not have become sexually related to the merger of schools. Accordingly, the portion of the second-day lodging expenses, which was not treated as a business trip, was used as the meal expenses for the visitors. The Plaintiff was not only treated as a business trip, but also the Plaintiff was actually accommodated in a business trip, and thus, cannot be deemed to have been wrongfully used.

B) The unpaid portion of the chartered bus fee

The plaintiff paid a bus fee to the spouse, and the spouse did not pay the bus fee to the plaintiff, and the bus company did not request the payment to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff was entirely aware of the fact that the bus fee was not paid to the plaintiff.

C) The portion of unauthorized removal from the place of work where a business trip was sent.

Although the plaintiff did not make a business trip more than the principal of another school, the plaintiff did not interfere with the working discipline or neglect his/her duties through a business trip.

The plaintiff performed most business trips in accordance with its purpose, operated a lot of on-site learning and camping with experience and knowledge through the business trip to assist students, and carried out business affairs in good faith on the inter-day day.

D) In relation to the purchase of teaching materials for care (1) disturbance of accounting order, such as unfair job order, there was a voice of the Plaintiff’s complaint that childcare instructors do not purchase the teaching materials even if they talk about the purchase of teaching materials, and that they purchased the teaching materials directly by the Plaintiff, which was for teachers and students.

(2) In relation to the purchase of information technology goods, the Plaintiff did not designate a specific company to purchase the goods, and the Plaintiff negotiated the price in direct currency with the teachers of the Namsan Elementary School.

E) The fact that the accounting of KRW 1 million received from the head of the Dong-dong Council for the receipt of illegal support money and the delay in the process of school development fund is merely a simple number of times delayed for six days, and KRW 500,000 received from the head of the Dong-dong Council for the first time according to the donor’s will and later delivered to the head of the Office of Administration by making it available for the students who feel the last problem while receiving the meal expenses of the teachers and staff at the first time.

2) Abuse of discretionary power

Considering the fact that the Plaintiff had faithfully lived and provided educational services as a teacher near 40 years, the fact that the Plaintiff was retired from the retirement age at the time of the disposition of the instant demotion, and the determination of the disciplinary action against similar cases, the disposition of the instant demotion is too harsh.

B. Relevant statutes

The provisions of the attached Table shall be as specified in the statutes.

C. Determination

1) Determination as to the existence of grounds for disciplinary action

In full view of the purport of Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 5, 6, 8 (including each number), Eul evidence 10-4, and Eul evidence 10-4, the plaintiff, including the plaintiff, the school operation chairperson, the community team leader, the merged manager, and the head of the administrative office, was provided with meals on October 13, 201, and the plaintiff actually used 40,000 won to the head of the administrative office assigned the above restaurant.

B) Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of pleadings with the evidence Nos. 5 and 7 (including each number), the Plaintiff leased a chartered bus for transporting married passengers from the Chungcheongnamnam Tourism Co., Ltd. on February 11, 2012, which was entering into a charter bus agreement with the Namnam Tourism Co., Ltd. on the side of the Southern Elementary School. ② the number of employees of Chungcheong Tourism Co., Ltd. stated that the chartered bus was not paid until April 18, 2012. ③ The Plaintiff asserted that the chartered bus price was paid to the Chungcheongnam Tourism Co., Ltd. on May 2, 2012 at the request of the public officials of the Republic of Korea, and the Plaintiff was found to have paid the chartered bus price to the said public officials of the Republic of Korea on May 4, 2012. The Plaintiff was found to have been unfairly informed of the reasons for the disciplinary action against the Plaintiff on May 2, 2012.

C) The portion of unauthorized removal from the place of work where a business trip was sent.

갑 제4, 6호증, 을 제5, 6, 9호증 ( 각 가지번호 포함 ), 을 제10호증의 4의 각 기재에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하여 알 수 있는 다음과 같은 사정 즉, ① 원고는 2011학년도 ( 2011. 3. 1. ~ 2012. 2. 28. ) 기간 동안 관외출장 118일, 관내출장 101일 등 총 219일 ( 수업일수 207일 대비 약 105 %, 총 근무일수 267일 대비 약 82 % ) 의 출장을 실시하였는데, 이는 관내에 교감이 배치되지 않은 ▣▣초등학교나 초등학교 학교장과 비교할 때, 출장일수 기준으로 2배가 넘는바, ●●초등학교가 교감이 배치되어 있지 않아 학교장의 역할이 중요한 점을 고려할 때 원고의 출장 횟수는 그 자체로 부당하게 과도한 측면이 있고, 각 출장의 내용과 관련하여 원고가 제출한 갑 제5호증의 기재만으로는 그 정당성을 쉽게 납득하기 어려운 점, ② 원고의 출장 중 고속도로 후불카드 사용내역으로 고속도로 통행시간이 확인되는 일부 출장의 경우 ( 2011. 5. 4 .

I. On September 4, 2011, on November 29, 2011, the plaintiff applied for a business trip on the two-day preceding the business trip (9:00 to 18:00) and on December 15, 2011, although the plaintiff applied for a business trip on the two-day preceding the business trip, it is confirmed that the plaintiff started a business trip on the part of the plaintiff's domicile and started a business trip immediately on the new wall on the following day. The above series of business trips are difficult to be deemed to be a normal business trip, and the plaintiff violated Article 58 (6) of the State Public Officials Act in light of the fact that the plaintiff violated Article 58 (6) of the State Public Officials Act in light of the fact that most of the bills related to the operation of B/U school are late due to frequent business trips, (21:00) and the next bill was made, and that the plaintiff did not approve it in an excessive manner.

Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that a person violates the grounds for disciplinary action.

라 ) 부당한 직무명령 등 회계질서 문란 ( 1 ) 먼저 돌봄교실 독서논술 교재 구입에 관한 부분을 살피건대, 을 제5호증의 1, 제10호증의 1, 2, 5, 9, 10의 각 기재 및 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면, ① 돌봄교실 강사 한지은은 2011. 10. 1. 경 돌봄교실 교사 김▦▦에게 학생들을 상대로 독서논술교육을 하고 싶다며 6명분의 교재 구입을 요청한 사실, ② 그럼에도 원고는 담당교사인 김▦▦과 상의 없이 2011. 11. 경 서산지역에서 10년 전부터 알고 지낸 안NN으로부터 총 188권의 독서논술 교재 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 교재 ' 라 한다 ) 를 정가에서 10 % 할인된 가액인 1, 353, 600원에 구매한 사실, ③ 교사 김▦▦은, 이 사건 교재가 그 내용이나 품질이 원하던 바에 못 미치고, 필요에 비하여 너무 많은 수량이며, 대량 구매임에도 할인폭이 낮아 가격이 비싼 점 등을 들어 이 사건 교재의 반품을 거듭 건의하였으나, 원고는 합당한 이유 없이 김▦▦의 위 건의를 묵살한 채 이 사건 교재 구입에 관한 기안을 올릴 것을 지시한 사실, ④ 원고의 거듭된 지시에 따라, 결국 김▦▦은 2011학년도 학교회계 마감일 무렵인 2012. 2. 20. 원고에게 이 사건 교재 구매에 관한 지출품의서를 작성하여 기안을 올렸고 , 안SN은 2012. 2. 27. 이 사건 교재 대금 전액을 지급받은 사실, ⑤ 이 사건 교재가 2011. 11. 경 ●●초등학교로 납품된 이후에도, 돌봄교실의 논술교육에는 이 사건 교재와 별도로 구입된 독서 논술교재 6권만 사용되었고, 이 사건 교재는 3개월 정도 사용되지 않고 박스 채로 돌봄교실에 방치되다 2012. 2. 29. 교장실로 옮겨졌으며, 그 이후에도 달리 활용되지 않은 사실 등이 인정된다. 위 인정사실에 의하면, 원고는 필요 이상의 물품을 비싸게 구입하여 이를 방치함으로써 국가공무원법 제56조 ( 성실의무 ) 를 위반하고, 이에 반대하는 김▦▦의 정당한 건의를 묵살한 채 그에게 지출품의서를 작성하도록 하여 공무원 행동강령 제4조의 공정한 직무수행을 해치는 지시를 하였다고 볼 것이므로, 이 또한 징계사유에 해당한다 .

(2) Next, Article 39 of the National Elementary and Secondary School Accounting Rules (wholly amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology No. 168, Dec. 26, 2012) provides that where the head of a school intends to enter into a contract, he/she shall publicly announce the fact that it is necessary in light of the purpose, nature, size, regional characteristics, etc. of the contract, he/she may place a contract to a general competition: Provided, That where it is deemed necessary in light of the purpose, characteristics, etc. of the contract, he/she may place a contract to a competitive competition by limiting the qualification of a participant, by designating a participant, or by making a free contract, (i) Article 40(1)4 of the same Rule provides that the head of a school may enter into a free contract in cases of manufacturing, purchasing, services, or other contracts for goods of 30 million won or less pursuant to the proviso to Article 39, and (2) provides that a written estimate shall be obtained from at least two persons.

그런데 을 제10호증의 6 내지 8의 각 기재에 의하면, 교무부장 임NS, 정보담당 교사 최U, 교사 김▦▦, 행정실장 노□□ 등 4명의 교직원은 2012. 2. 15. 14 : 00경 교무실에서 ●●초등학교 교육정보화기기 ( 교실용 TV, 학생용 태블릿 PC ) 를 구입하기 위하여 선정위원회를 개최하여 교육정보화기기 구매에 관한 품목, 수량 및 소요액 등에 관한 계획을 세웠으나, 원고는 위 선정위원회의 회의결과와 상관없이 원고의 지시대로 물품을 구매해야 한다고 지시한 사실, 그리하여 원고의 지시대로 ● 초등학교는 다른 업체로부터 달리 견적서를 받지 아니한 채 서산에 소재한 광명프라자 서령점으로부터 LED TV 46인치 ( 제품명 : UN46D6900WF ) 3대, 태블릿 PC ( 갤럭시탭 10. 1 ) 10대 등 총 12, 020, 000원 상당의 교육용정보화기기를 구매한 사실이 인정되는바, 위 인정사실에 의하면, 원고는 합리적인 이유 없이 교육정보화기기 선정위원회의 결정을 무시하고 독단적으로 물품의 구매를 지시하여 공무원행동강령 제4조의 공정한 직무수행을 해치는 지시를 하는 한편, 추정가격 500만 원 이상 물품을 구입하면서도 2인 이상으로부터 견적서를 받지 않음으로써 국립초 · 중등학교 회계규칙 제40조 제2항에 위반한 것이므로, 이 또한 징계사유에 해당한다 .

마 ) 불법찬조금 수수 및 학교발전기금 지연 처리을 제5, 11호증 ( 각 가지번호 포함 ) 의 각 기재 및 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면, 원고는 2011. 4. 19. 경 충남 당진군 면천면 소재 암소가든에서 총동창회장 심▩▩으로부터 현금 100만 원을 학교발전기금으로 전달받고 2011. 4. 25. 행정실장에게 전달하여 학교발전기금으로 처리한 사실, 2011. 10. 7. ●●초등학교 10회 동창회장 현로부터 현금 50만원을 전달받고 행정실장의 권유로 위 동창회장에게 전화로 용도를 재확인하고 2011. 10. 25. 학교발전기금으로 처리한 사실을 인정할 수 있다. 위 인정사실에 나타난 원고의 행위가 적절한 처신이었다고 볼 수는 없겠으나, 총동창회장으로부터 받은 100만 원을 6일 후에 처리한 부분은 단순한 실수라 볼 여지가 있다. 또한, 원고가 10회 동창회장으로부터 교직원들의 식사비로 50만 원을 지급받은 부분도 , 그 금원수수의 의도가 불순하다고 단정하기 어렵고, 이후 이를 임의로 소비하지 않고 행정실장의 권유에 따라 적절히 처리한 점에 비추어 보면, 이들 행위까지 징계사유에 해당한다고 보기는 어렵다고 할 것이다 .

2) As seen above, as to whether there was deviation from or abuse of discretionary power, the part of the instant disciplinary cause, “the receipt of illegal assistance and delayed handling of school development funds” cannot be a justifiable cause for disciplinary action. However, other parts of the instant disciplinary cause, i.e., “the illegal use of corporate cards, ② the payment of rent for chartered bus, ③ the absence of rent for chartered bus, ③ the absence of a business trip, ④ the omission of a business trip, and the violation of accounting order, such as unfair order for duties, can be

B) However, if it is sufficient to recognize the validity of the relevant disciplinary action only with the remaining grounds that are recognized even if some of the grounds for disciplinary action are not recognized, the relevant disciplinary action may be maintained (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Du19144, Feb. 25, 2010). On the other hand, when a disciplinary action is taken due to the grounds for disciplinary action, it shall be held at the discretion of the person having authority over disciplinary action. Thus, the disciplinary action can be deemed unlawful only when it is deemed that the person having authority over disciplinary action has abused discretion entrusted to the person having authority over disciplinary action since the disciplinary action has considerably lost validity under the social social norms. In order to determine that a disciplinary action against a public official has considerably lost validity under the social social norms, it shall be deemed that the details and nature of the grounds for the disciplinary action, administrative purpose to be achieved by the disciplinary action, criteria for the determination of disciplinary action, etc. are clearly and objectively unreasonable (see Supreme Court Decision 200Du1813, Nov. 12, 2004).

C) According to the following facts: ① the Plaintiff was subject to a warning issued by the head of the Education Office in Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, from June 23, 2010 on the ground that he was unable to properly receive travel expenses and conduct business trips during the period from September 1, 2009 to May 7, 2010, and ② the Plaintiff was subject to a disposition of collecting KRW 992,200 on the ground that he was subject to an excessive measure of removal of KRW 200,000,000, which was deposited by the Elementary School on February 8, 2010, and ② the Plaintiff had been subject to an excessive measure of removal of KRW 20,000,000,000,000, which were deposited by the Cheongnam-do General Elementary School on February 9, 2011, and the Plaintiff had been subject to an excessive measure of removal of KRW 3,000,000,000,000.

As a disposition, it cannot be criticized that it has considerably lost validity under social norms. The plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Jong-ri

Judge Lee Dong-young

Judges Cho Jae-ra

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.