1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

On September 26, 2014, Jeju District Prosecutors' Office investigated and notified the Defendant of the irregularities regarding public officials of the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries, and the Plaintiff from B on August 10, 2013 among the above notification;

8. On September 7, 2013, each of the 500,000 won was received in cash.

The Defendant received notice of the above misconduct and examined the Plaintiff on August 10, 201, and determined that the Plaintiff received cash and entertainment from B by receiving KRW 125,000 for golf expenses, KRW 20,00 for meal expenses, KRW 135,00 for golf expenses on August 11, 2013, and KRW 500,000 for cash on September 7, 2013.

On April 3, 2015, the defendant demanded a disciplinary resolution to add twice the minor disciplinary action and disciplinary additional charges on the ground of the violation of the duty of integrity against the plaintiff based on the results of the above investigation.

Accordingly, the Central Disciplinary Committee recognized the misconduct requested on July 10, 2015 and decided on the disciplinary action of 1 month of suspension from office and 3 times of disciplinary charges against the plaintiff.

On July 23, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition imposing the Plaintiff one month of suspension from office and three times of disciplinary surcharge (780,000) (hereinafter “instant disposition”) (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The Plaintiff filed an appeal review against the instant disposition, but the appeals review committee dismissed the appeal review on January 20, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including a branch number), and the purport of the entire argument as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case, the plaintiff's assertion that the disposition of this case was lawful due to the mistake of facts, and thus, the disposition of this case was unlawful, and even if the ground for partial disposition of domestic affairs is recognized, the disposition of this case constitutes deviation and abuse of discretion due to excessive excessive excess.

Judgment

Each of the above evidence and evidence of Nos. 7 through 9, No. 1, 3, 4, and 5, and the whole purport of the arguments.