1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a public official of class V local agriculture who served in Gangwon-do-do-affiliated B Education Center (hereinafter “Education Center”) from January 31, 2006 to February 13, 2011.

B. On March 7, 2011, the Minister of the Interior and Safety (the current Ministry of the Interior and Safety) found the Defendant’s “inspection of public official discipline, such as the time limit of the year, explanation, etc.” and notified the Plaintiff of the fact that he/she found the same misconduct as indicated in the attached Table 1, which took measures in relation to the status and administration of the Plaintiff,

C. On March 18, 2011, the Defendant demanded the Gangwon-do Personnel Committee to adopt a heavy disciplinary resolution against the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 2(3) of the Local Public Officials Discipline and Appeal Regulations, and the said Committee passed a resolution against the Plaintiff on March 30, 201 as “three months of demotion and suspension from office,” and was subject to the same disciplinary disposition against the Plaintiff on April 25, 2011.

However, as the Gangwon-do Appeal Committee held on October 10, 201 upon the Plaintiff’s request for review revoked the above disposition on the ground of procedural defect, the Gangwon-do Personnel Committee re-decided on December 15, 201 as the “Gradation, etc.” on the ground that the Defendant rendered a disposition against the Plaintiff on January 5, 2012 on the ground of the violation of the duty of good faith due to the 8th misconduct under Article 69(1)1 of the Local Public Officials Act.

(The grounds for disciplinary action are as shown in Attachment 1). The plaintiff filed an appeal review, and the Gangwon-do appeals review committee made a decision to change the above disposition to "three months of suspension from office" on April 2, 2012.

(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition in this case"). 【No dispute exists on the ground of recognition - Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 9-1, 2, Eul evidence 1-1, 15, 16, Eul evidence 2 through 4 (including the relevant number), the purport of the whole pleadings and the purport of the whole pleadings, as shown in the evidence of No. 1, No. 9-1, No. 1, No. 15, 16, and No. 2 through No. 4 (including the relevant number).

2. Attached Form 2 of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the failure to comply with the cause of disciplinary action, such as dismissal.