1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

From May 29, 2013, the Plaintiff served as an officer in charge of education assistance for the third education team of the Army Training Center B, the Army Training Center.

On March 10, 2017, the Defendant violated the duty to maintain dignity by putting the Plaintiff into verbal abuse against the Plaintiff on the part of C Byung who violated the order to take a portable training for the mobile-livering time, putting the Plaintiff into verbal abuse against D, which is the director of C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C, which is the director of the C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C, and putting into verbal abuse against part of D at the latest, including D, at the latest, the identification of the number of firearms, etc. after returning to the night shooting, and ordering D D C C C C C to refrain from using the Plaintiff’s personal goods, but the Defendant committed a non-physical act, such as committing abusively

(hereinafter referred to as "each of the instant disciplinary actions") was subject to one month of suspension from office for reasons of the disciplinary action.

Each of the facts of the disciplinary actions in this case are as shown in attached Form 1.

On April 5, 2017, the Plaintiff appealed against the Defendant’s above suspension from office, and filed an appeal with the Army Education Commander on April 5, 2017. On May 26, 2017, the Army Education Commander held an appeals review committee against the Plaintiff and decided to reduce the Plaintiff’s reduction of salary for three months.

(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case"). (No dispute exists with the grounds for recognition, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 8, and 9, and one of the members of the disciplinary committee against the plaintiff's assertion as to whether the disposition of this case is legitimate or not, one of the members of the disciplinary committee against the plaintiff's assertion as to the issue related to the work of the plaintiff's duty which is not related to the facts of each of the disciplinary actions of this case was examined as the facts subject to disciplinary deliberation

This is not only in violation of disciplinary procedures prescribed by the Military Personnel Management Act, the Military Disciplinary Order, and the Enforcement Rule of the Military Personnel Disciplinary Order, but also illegal as it unfairly infringes on the plaintiff's right

Article 13 (1) of the Decree on Disciplinary Measures against Military Personnel shall be imposed.