logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.10.23 2014구합1049
해임처분취소
Text

1. The Defendant’s dismissal disposition against the Plaintiff on December 10, 2013 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is appointed as a local public official of Gyeonggi-do on December 3, 1983 and from November 25, 2010 to January 24, 2013, as a local administrative official, from Gyeonggi-do corporate policy to B, and from January 25, 2013 to January 24, 2013.

9. Until September 23, 2011, Gyeonggi-do Educational Cooperation and C, from September 24, 2013, the Gyeonggi-do Construction Headquarters was working as North Deputy Road and D.

Grounds for disciplinary action.

A. On July 22, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) received a settlement report from FF schools on five occasions with respect to “mentoring business (Domening Business)” on July 22, 2013; and (b) directly examined the settlement report; and (c) reported the issues, countermeasures, and future measures to the head of the education cooperation division and the director of the lifelong education bureau.

However, as the plaintiff's unilateral assertion, the opinion difference, such as entering port from F school, is serious and conflict occurs, and the director general of the lifelong education bureau instructed that "the F school will comply with the F school's settlement measures after due verification and consultation, thereby maintaining the security."

Nevertheless, on July 22, 2013, the day on which the Plaintiff received the instructions to maintain security, the Plaintiff posted photographs to G in order to inform the organization intending to open the processed matter with knowledge of the organization, as follows. They publish them as follows. These illegal corruption principals are different from each other, and on the same day, “I inform the Gyeonggi-do public officials of the overall illegal corruption or solicitation.” On the same day, the Plaintiff violated the duty of obeying orders by photographing and attaching the reported materials as a result of the settlement of accounts.

In addition, even though the above report is not verified or confirmed, it is believed that the above report is in the Internet media such as the Yonhap News on July 24, 2013 and the following media.

arrow