beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. Since being appointed as a local public official in B Si around July 1990, the Plaintiff was in charge of supporting the so-called "labor-management situation" cooperation with B Si industrial economy from August 1, 2007 to July 7, 2010.
B. On June 24, 2009, the Korea Labor Union Federation C regional branch (hereinafter “Korea Labor Union C branch”) notified the Defendant of the cost expenditure plan related to the labor union members education project conducted by the said branch in the second half of 2009, and applied for a subsidy for part of the cost. On July 14, 2009, the Defendant applied for a subsidy for the part of the cost. On July 14, 2009, the Defendant participated in the work under the name of 1,500,000,000 under the name of the labor union members, 1,000,000,000,000, 2,000,000,000, 5,500,000,000 under the name of the labor union members training expenses for the first half of the year. The Plaintiff participated in the work as a working-level of the said subsidy.
C. The Korea Labor-General C branch holds one of the above projects, from September 14, 2009 to September 19, 2009, the events of "labor-management joint overseas training" in 2009, while the 18 representative or working-level workers of "labor-management circumstances" including the Plaintiff, including the Plaintiff, were held, and its expenses were covered by 1,490,000 won per person from the subsidies received from the Defendant and the participants under the name of the Defendant, and the Plaintiff did not pay for the participation under the understanding of the Korea Labor-General C branch.
On September 29, 2009, the Korea Labor-General C branch reported the result of the disbursement of subsidies of KRW 2,00,000 and self-paid charges of participants in events, totaling KRW 23,563,650, and KRW 25,563,650, which were subsidized under the pretext of the exercise of overseas training, to the Defendant. The Plaintiff received the report as a working-level, and made it available for public inspection to the head of the regional economy team, who is the approving authority.