1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as follows, except where part of the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed, deleted, or added as stated in Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts which are scraped or deleted;

(a) the 5th page " not," and the 9th page " not," respectively;

(b) in Part 11, part 13, “The head of the instant department” through part 15, shall be deleted from the same page.

(c) in Part 13, "13.2.13 (b)" in Part 13 is changed to "14.2.13 (b)."

Part 18 (5) "Grounds for Disposition 4" shall be deemed to be "the fourth misconduct".

3. The addition;

A. Next, Article 2(1) [Attachment 1] of the former Enforcement Rule of the Disciplinary Decree of the Public Officials Disciplinary Decree (wholly amended by Ordinance of the Prime Minister No. 1220, Dec. 29, 2015) provides that “Where the degree of violation of the duty of good faith and breach of duty is serious, gross negligence, or the degree of such violation is weak, and there is an intentional act,” the disciplinary standard of “in the case of violation of the duty of good faith and breach of duty,” shall be the minimum demotion or suspension from office. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s 1 through 5 of the act of misconduct shall be added as “where the degree is weak and there is an intentional act.”

B. Under Part 9 of Part 21, the head of the division of this case asserts that the disposition of this case was in violation of the equity on the ground that the plaintiff was subject to the minor disciplinary action, but the principle of equality is prohibited from arbitrarily treating the same in essence or treating the same differently. Thus, unless there is any evidence that the grounds for the disciplinary action against the head of the division of this case are the same as the grounds for the disciplinary action against the plaintiff, this part of the plaintiff's assertion under the premise that the two are identical is without merit.

(c)On the 6th page, the following shall be added:

▣ 구 공무원징계령 시행규칙 2015. 12. 29. 총리령...