1. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.

2. The part of the conjunctive claim in the instant lawsuit is dismissed.

3...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff was newly appointed as a local administrative secretary on October 19, 1992, and was officially promoted to the local educational administrative officer on July 1, 2006. From January 1, 2013, the Plaintiff served as the head of the administrative office at B elementary school from January 1, 2013.

B. On March 25, 2014, the Defendant demanded a resolution of heavy disciplinary action against the Plaintiff on the ground that “Around December 19, 2013, the Plaintiff committed an indecent act by forcing the Plaintiff to feel sexual humiliation by committing an indecent act by inducing C by inserting a deep seat of teachers C, by inserting a deep seat of teachers C around December 19, 2013 (hereinafter “instant misconduct”) with the personnel committee of the Daegu Metropolitan Office of Education (hereinafter “personnel committee”) on the ground that it violated Articles 48 and 55 of the Local Public Officials Act.”

C. Meanwhile, on March 19, 2014, the Plaintiff was sent to the Daegu-dong District Prosecutor’s Office on March 19, 2014, and was indicted on March 26, 2014 by the Daegu District Court 2014Kadan1523. On April 18, 2014, the Personnel Committee decided to suspend the Plaintiff’s disciplinary resolution until the judgment of the first instance court for the purpose of clearly confirming the Plaintiff’s demand for the disciplinary resolution.

After that ruling of the first instance court ordering the Plaintiff to complete a sexual assault treatment program for 2 million won and 40 hours, the personnel committee decided on September 12, 2014 that the Plaintiff’s instant misconduct constituted a violation of the duty of good faith under Article 48 of the Local Public Officials Act and the duty to maintain dignity under Article 55 of the Local Public Officials Act. Accordingly, on September 26, 2014, the Defendant issued a reduction of salary for 3 months against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

E. However, in the appellate case against the Plaintiff on May 21, 2015 (Tgu District Court 2014No3151 by indecent act), the court is deemed to have caused the Plaintiff to put his hand in the part of C, but the court is deemed to have committed an act contrary to the good sexual moral sense beyond simply causing the victim’s inconvenience.