(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.01.12 2015누53598

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.01.12 2015누53598

해임처분취소등

Text

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.

Reasons

1. Grounds for admitting the judgment of the court of first instance to be used in this case are 2. Grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance

D. (2) Of the part of the judgment, "n.e., that the plaintiff does not reflect his or her misconduct, such as denying the facts of this case and consistently making a vindication, etc." is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, and therefore, it shall be cited pursuant to Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act except for the following dismissal. (5) Article 2 (1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Decree of the Disciplinary Decree of the Public Officials Disciplinary Committee at the time of the disposition of this case provides that "the Disciplinary Committee shall make a decision on disciplinary action in accordance with the disciplinary criteria in attached Table 1 in consideration of the type of misconduct committed by the suspect of disciplinary action, degree of misconduct, degree of work performance, public service, degree of penance, and other circumstances." Article 5 (2) provides that "Where the disciplinary committee again demands a disciplinary decision due to any misconduct that occurred during the period of restriction on promotion under Article 32 of the Decree, the disciplinary committee shall make a decision on disciplinary action to the extent of dismissal falling under the above 2."

In light of the above circumstances and the following circumstances admitted by each evidence, the Plaintiff’s dismissal decision, which is a second step disciplinary action, may be made than the suspension from office, because the degree of misconduct is weak and it is difficult to view the Plaintiff’s dismissal as a transitional position.

As the plaintiff is under investigation or investigation, C is a monetary problem from its partners.

참조조문

-공무원 징계령 시행규칙 제2조 제1항

-공무원임용령 제32조

-민사소송법 제420조

-행정소송법 제8조 제2항

유사 판례

-부산고등법원 2019.11.06 2019나53696

-대법원 2019.12.24 2019두48684

-광주고등법원 (전주) 2017.02.06 2016누1481

-서울행정법원 2020.10.29 2020구합54838

-서울고등법원 2021.04.21 2020누58368