1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding any supplementary judgment below, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the

2. Supplementary judgment

A. Article 17(1) of the Public Service Ethics Act provides that a person subject to employment review shall not be employed by a private company, etc. closely related to the business of the department or institution to which he/she belonged. In such a case, whether the “contributing relationship” is recognized shall be determined according to whether the business of the department that directs and supervises the performance of duties falls under any of the subparagraphs of Article 17(2). On the premise that the individual and specific business circumstances of the retired public official at the time of his/her employment cannot be considered, the Defendant asserts that the instant disposition is lawful, on the basis that the Plaintiff’s work as a full-time auditor of B University and that of the non-party company, which

B. Article 17(1) of the Public Service Ethics Act provides that a retired public official engaged in a certain position or job field shall not be employed by a private enterprise, etc. whose size is not less than a certain size closely related to the business of the department to which he belonged for five years prior to his retirement from the date of his retirement. As to the scope of close relevance to the business of the department to which he belongs, each subparagraph of Article 17(2) and Article 32(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provide that the scope of business relationship with the private enterprises, etc. where employment is restricted, the scope of business relationship with the private enterprises, etc. where determining the scope of business relationship with which the public official is restricted, such as giving preferential treatment to a specific enterprise for employment after his retirement, thereby preventing the possibility of unfairly exercising the authority that he had worked before his retirement from being employed by