An act of the Myeon Director to enter into a negotiated contract in violation of Article 65 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Autonomy Act and a waiver of duty.

In the conclusion of the contract, such as the purchase and sale of the goods owned by the face-to-face and the contract for the management of the face-to-face construction, it is merely a failure to perform the legal procedure required in performing the duties, and it is not a waiver of duties.

Article 65 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Autonomy Act, Article 122 of the Criminal Act

Prosecutor Ock-young

Defendant

Cheongju area in the first instance, Seoul High Court in the second instance.

When the defendant concludes each contract for the sale and purchase of the goods from face-to-face and for the contract for the management of the company, the defendant asserts that the contract constitutes a waiver of duty without any competitive bidding pursuant to Article 65 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Autonomy Act. However, the so-called waiver of duty under the latter part of Article 122 of the Criminal Act is merely a case where the public official fails to perform the legal procedure required in performing his duties without any justifiable reason, and it cannot be viewed as a case where the public official abandons his duties without any justifiable reason under Article 45 of the State Public Officials Act or Article 66 of the Local Public Officials Ordinance, but it cannot be viewed as a case where the public official abandons his duties without any justifiable reason. Thus, the defendant's so-called abandonment of duty is not a case where

Justices Park Jae-up (Presiding Justice) and Kim Dong-dong and Do-dong (Presiding Justice)