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 January 16, 1984, the Plaintiff was appointed as an administrative assistant, and the Plaintiff voluntarily retired on December 31, 2015 while serving as the head of G Operation Support Division from December 3, 2015.

The departments to which the plaintiff belonged for five years before his retirement and the affairs in charge thereof shall be as follows:

BD E G F CH

B. On February 1, 2016, the Plaintiff was appointed as a director of the J, an incorporated association (hereinafter “J”) on February 1, 2016, and thereafter is serving as a standing director under the Association.

C. From February 1, 2016, the Plaintiff, on September 201, filed a request with the Defendant to verify whether employment was restricted (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the following grounds: (a) from February 1, 2016, the Plaintiff served as an executive director affiliated with the J; and (b) on December 23, 2016, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to verify whether employment was restricted (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The plaintiff has been working as the head of the D Operation Support Division at the time of employment with I and nine business cooperations.

DKK K K K K K K I also, when the plaintiff is employed by the Director of G Port Logistics Division, the plaintiff has promoted the work such as the change of the port loading and unloading fee in 2015, the extension of the port operation improvement project in 2015, and the guidance on the port business. The port logistics department was the direct control department for the Association.

G M The work related to the above is considered as "the work directly supervised in accordance with the laws and regulations" under Article 17 (2) 6 of the Public Service Ethics Act or "the work deemed to have a direct and considerable influence on the property rights of the employment-restricted institution" under Article 32 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. It is recognized that the work related closely is more likely to be achieved than the rights of the plaintiff such as freedom of choice of occupation.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 6 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The details of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes are as shown in attached statutes;

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1.