1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff was elected as the defendant E in the D election.

B. On July 23, 2015, the Plaintiff lent KRW 30 million to Nonparty F (hereinafter “the instant loan”) and received interest exceeding the maximum interest rate prescribed in the Interest Limitation Act from January 23, 2017, the Plaintiff was subject to an investigation by the investigative agency from around January 2017.

C. From February 3, 2017, media reports from around February 3, 2017, which led to the fact that the Plaintiff was investigated by police due to the suspicion of violating the Interest Limitation Act, have a very strong public opinion of criticism in society. Accordingly, the Defendant constituted a Special Committee on Ethics to examine the matters on the disciplinary action of the Plaintiff at the p

On March 15, 2017, the Defendant’s Special Committee on Ethics demanded the Plaintiff to appear and submit evidentiary materials, and on March 20, 2017, the Defendant decided to remove the Plaintiff on March 23, 2017 after undergoing the procedures for questioning and vindication with the Plaintiff.

E. On March 24, 2017, at the second plenary session of the Defendant’s 259 extraordinary session held on March 24, 2017, the issue of request for disciplinary punishment was presented for the reason that the Plaintiff violated the obligation to maintain integrity and dignity under Article 36(2) of the Local Autonomy Act. Of 13 incumbent National Assembly members, nine National Assembly members agreed to remove the Plaintiff and declared it at an open meeting.

(hereinafter "Disposition in this case"). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff, who did not have the grounds for disciplinary action 1, agreed to receive interest rate of 25% per annum within the scope of interest under the Interest Limitation Act while lending the instant loan to F.

F The amount paid either KRW 900,000 per month or KRW 1.2 million per month is paid irrespective of the Plaintiff’s intent, and the portion exceeding the interest calculated at the rate of 25% per annum is appropriated for the repayment of principal, and thus, is not a violation of the Interest Limitation Act.

In addition, the violation of the Interest Limitation Act is committed.