The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The first instance judgment is the purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal.

1. Since the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance court of basic facts is the same as “1. Basic Facts”, it shall be quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Provided, That the phrase "may not be refused" of the 22th judgment of the first instance court shall be read as "no refusal".

2. The Plaintiff stated on March 31, 2019 that “the Plaintiff had already passed the Plaintiff’s retirement age on March 31, 2019, before the instant lawsuit was filed, at the first hearing date of this Court.”

However, on December 7, 2020, the Plaintiff asserted that “the Plaintiff shall have a benefit to claim confirmation of invalidity of dismissal to eliminate the risk of employment restrictions on dismissed persons subject to corruption under the Act on the Prevention of Corruption and the Establishment and Operation of Civil Rights Commission (hereinafter “Corruption”),” through a written preparation made on December 7, 2020. Article 82(2) of the Act provides that “If the above dismissed persons are dismissed, the Plaintiff shall not be employed by any employment-restricted institution such as a public institution for five years from the date of their retirement.” The head of the Defendant’s headquarters provides that “The Plaintiff shall not be employed by any for-profit private enterprise, law firm, accounting corporation, and tax accounting corporation, etc., which are closely related to the departments to which the five years have belonged prior to his retirement pursuant to Article 82(2) of the Act on the Prevention of Corruption and the Prevention of Corruption and the Prevention of Corruption and the Prevention of Corruption and the Prevention of Corruption and Interests Act shall be deemed to have been invalidated in order to avoid restrictions on the opportunity for re-employment.

The decision is judged.

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The dismissal of the instant defect in the disciplinary procedure is a defect as follows.

A) The Defendant’s disciplinary committee members infringed the Plaintiff’s right of defense, such as interfering with the Plaintiff’s statement and blocking the opportunity for vindication in the disciplinary procedure.

B) In a case where a complaint is filed against a disciplinary action, the defendant's personnel management guidelines (Evidence A No. 7) are as follows. 50 (2).