1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 1, 2006, the Plaintiff is a civilian military employee who was appointed as Class-V and served as the regional commander of the 50th unit of the 2nd unit of the 2nd unit of the 2nd unit of the 50th unit of the 2nd unit of the 2nd unit of the 50th unit of the 2nd

B. On October 10, 2016, following the resolution of the disciplinary committee, the Defendant issued a reprimand against the Plaintiff on the grounds that the Plaintiff violated his/her duty to maintain dignity (hereinafter “Disciplinary Reason 1”), violated his/her duty to comply with statutes (hereinafter “Disciplinary Reason 2”), and otherwise violated his/her duty to maintain dignity (hereinafter “Disciplinary Reason 3”) (hereinafter “Disciplinary Reason 3”) as the grounds for disciplinary action.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed against the instant disposition on November 4, 2016 to the Appeals Review Committee of the Army Headquarters 2, but the said Appeal Review Committee dismissed the appeal on March 16, 2017.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the circumstances under the Plaintiff’s assertion, the instant disposition did not exist or mistakenly misleads the Plaintiff into fact, and was excessively excessive to the Plaintiff against the principle of proportionality and equity, thereby abusing discretion.

1. The grounds for disciplinary action No. 1 are as of March 28, 2016 by the Plaintiff.

6. On May 30, 2016, there was no 14th injury or disease C’s bath, and there was a luxation in the carbook in which the lux is recorded, but this was a little appraisal, and all of the facts subject to disciplinary action were distorted.

This part of the grounds for disciplinary action is based on a false statement unilaterally prepared by the above C and D with the direction of the E commander who intends to make the plaintiff, and is not true or excessively exaggerated.

2. Regarding the grounds for the 2nd disciplinary action, C was involved in the gathering of spawn in front of the office, or D brought water to the chemical team. However, this is merely limited to the support by itself.