1. The Defendant’s removal from office against the Plaintiff on August 6, 2018 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff was appointed as an administrative secretary on March 28, 1992, and was promoted to the administrative secretary on April 1, 1994, the administrative secretary on August 5, 200, and the administrative assistant on December 31, 2008, and the head of B post office business from July 1, 2017.

B. On August 6, 2018, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 78(1)3 of the State Public Officials Act, following a resolution of the General Disciplinary Committee of the Ministry of Science and ICT, on the ground that the Plaintiff violated the duty to maintain dignity under Article 63 of the State Public Officials Act, as the following grounds for

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). Grounds for resolution

1. On June 26, 2018, the Plaintiff: (a) completed a screening process for the Plaintiff’s staff member B post office employees; and (b) at around 22:20, the official director of the operating division, in relation to the division of duties, the Plaintiff committed sexual indecent acts, such as making the Plaintiff sparing and dancing the victim, while talking with the victim; and (c) thereafter, the Plaintiff was forced to be off his/her clothes, off his/her clothes, and attempted to sexual assault, but the Plaintiff was forced to resist and resist the victim’s clothes.

The plaintiff's act is in violation of Article 63 (Duty to Maintain Dignity) of the State Public Officials Act, and it falls under Article 78 (Disciplinary Grounds) of the same Act.

2. The plaintiff's assertion (Omission);

3. The decision of the Ministry of Science and ICT General Disciplinary Committee (Omission) held that the Plaintiff committed a sexual indecent act by drinking a vehicle from a staff member of the post office B on June 26, 2018, and working on around 22:15 minutes from the official director of the operating division, and trying to have the victim enjoy and dance with the victim due to division of duties. Although the victim did not state his/her consent, he/she was found to have off the clothes of the victim even though he/she did not state his/her consent, according to the expert opinion submitted by the Gangseo-gu Regional Communications Office to the Korean Committee, the Plaintiff’s job performance is defective by using the position of director.