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. The Plaintiff was appointed as a public educational official on March 1, 1992, and served in the middle school annexed to the college of education at B universities from March 1, 2006 to February 28, 2010, and in the C High School from March 1, 2010 to February 28, 2013 (hereinafter “C high school”).
B. On October 20, 2016, the Defendant deemed that the Plaintiff violated Articles 56 (Duty of Good Faith) and 63 (Duty of Good Faith) of the State Public Officials Act as follows, and accordingly, dismissed the Plaintiff through a resolution of the General Disciplinary Committee on Public Educational Officials in Gwangju Metropolitan City pursuant to Article 78(1) of the State Public Officials Act (hereinafter “previous Disposition”).
On October 201, the Plaintiff, who worked as a fixed-term teacher in CJ, proposed that D would be employed as a private school teacher by “one time, with the knowledge of the route that can be employed as a private school teacher” and that D would be employed as a private school teacher. Upon D’s approval, the Plaintiff, in collusion with E, had D prepare for KRW 80 million as a fund for employment.
Then, on December 14, 201, five members, including Plaintiff, E, F, D, and D’s mother, paid KRW 80 million to F on the condition that D, from the coffee shop located in the Gwangju Metropolitan City Standing District, up to March 1, 201, up to March 1, 201, he would employ D as a private school teacher, and F, for the guarantee of payment, F, E, the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff prepared a loan certificate with D’s mother’s mother.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff received the above KRW 80 million in collaboration with E and F.
C. On February 8, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an appeal review with the Appeal Commission for Teachers, and the Appeal Commission for Teachers revoked the previous disposition on the ground that the previous disposition was abused or abused the discretion due to excessive disciplinary action.
Accordingly, on March 31, 2017, the Defendant again made a resolution by the General Disciplinary Committee of Gwangju Metropolitan City on the grounds of the foregoing disciplinary cause.