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, 1980, the Plaintiff was appointed as a public educational official and served as the principal on September 1, 2005, and was promoted to the principal on September 1, 2005, and on February 1, 2013, the Plaintiff was dispatched to a D school located in Busan-gu, Busan-si, a Chinese educational institution abroad on September 1, 2014.

B. The Ministry of Education received a civil petition against the misconduct of receiving money from the head of the D School Administration, conducted a civil petition investigation from February 22, 2015 to February 26, 2015. On March 25, 2015, the Ministry of Education notified the Defendant of the result of the civil petition investigation and the request for a minor disciplinary measure against the Plaintiff. On June 1, 2015, the Defendant requested a disciplinary measure against the Plaintiff, and the relevant disciplinary committee passed a resolution on the reduction of salary for the Plaintiff on June 11, 2015.

Based on the result of the above Disciplinary Committee, on June 18, 2015, the Defendant deemed that the Plaintiff violated Articles 56 and 63 of the State Public Officials Act in relation to the operation of D Schools for the following reasons, and was subject to a disciplinary measure for three months of salary reduction for the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). On January 2014, at the time of the implementation of the project for the operation of the Republic of Korea Language Training Program around 2014, the program proceeds without undergoing deliberation by the school operating committee in advance in relation to the selection of the language training company. 2. The total amount of the expenses for the language training is not included in the school accounting. 3. The school principal unilaterally changed the school operating schedule without considering parents’ opinion gathering and local conditions. 4. All of the above reasons are the following: (a) improper operation of personnel management in relation to the recruitment of school employees (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant reasons”; and (b) setting each of the reasons in sequence.

On June 25, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a petition review with the Appeal Commission for Teachers seeking revocation of the instant disposition, but was dismissed on August 12, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 2, 3, 4, 8, Eul evidence 5, Eul 3.