1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 1, 1989, the Plaintiff was appointed as a middle and high school teacher, and on March 1, 2013, the Plaintiff served as a sports head teacher who instructs and supervises the stable, pening, and human roller in Yongsan-gu Seoul on March 1, 2014.

B. From January 10, 2015 to January 12, 2015, the Plaintiff was going to a business trip to the Tong-gu, the Dong-dong training area for the Dong-dong.

On January 10, 2015, the Plaintiff moved to a training place where D was loaded with C (Plaintiff’s wife) and D (parents of students in the So-gu Department at the time of high school).

The plaintiff, C, and D were accommodated in Egypt for 3 days of 20 days of stay, and D settled 200,000 won of accommodation expenses on January 12, 2015.

C. C received golf loans in an amount of KRW 1,200,000 from D, the second floor car page of the Fransung Co., Ltd. located in Yong-si, on February 1, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “Franchis-ro”). On February 7, 2015, C received golf loans in an amount of KRW 1,60,000 ( KRW 600,000) for men’s use (hereinafter referred to as “grespond and Bos-ton”).

C on March 1, 2015, from D, received the G Bank Airline Card in an amount equivalent to KRW 500,000 at a restaurant located in the city of G Bank.

D, on July 16, 2015, the head of the B High School found a school room in B High School and stated that the Plaintiff provided golf loans.

C found D on the same day 23:00 D and returned golf bonds, vehicle souvenirs, and flag cards.

From August 24, 2015 to August 27, 2015, the Defendant conducted an audit on the Plaintiff, and requested an investigative agency to investigate the Plaintiff on October 12, 2015.

On April 26, 2016, the Plaintiff and C received non-prosecution (no suspicion) on the ground that “it is difficult to readily conclude that a bribe is received in the crime of acceptance of bribe under the Criminal Act.”

F. On February 1, 2017, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff on the ground that the following facts violate the duty of integrity under Article 61 of the State Public Officials Act, and Article 14(4) of the Code of Conduct for Public Officials.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff is the chief teacher of the sports division, from January 10, 2015 to January 12, 2015, from the parents of the sports division at the Gannam-gu business trip site.