The propriety of the removal disposition against the financial guidance of the financial guidance that has been made by arbitrarily lowering the performance of property tax payment to be exempted from the call for defense;

After the head of the finance division of the Myeon alters the amount of property tax of KRW 3,66 won recorded in his/her property tax collection book at the request of another person, he/she has prepared and delivered a family situation statement of KRW 2,820, which entered property tax into 2,820, thereby allowing his/her children to be subjected to a disposition of exemption from call-up for defense, and instead, the original copy of the property tax ledger is reversed to conceal such misconduct, and the disposition of removal from office of the head of the Gun is justifiable, because it constitutes a violation of good faith in filing and keeping the tax ledger of KRW 2

Article 48 of the Local Public Officials Act

Attorney Choi Ho-ho, Counsel for the plaintiff

Attorney Lee Chang-gun et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Daegu High Court Decision 82Gu154 delivered on November 16, 1982

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The Plaintiff’s attorney’s ground of appeal is examined.

The facts of the plaintiff's misconduct duly confirmed by the court below are that the plaintiff, as a local agricultural and forestry engineer of the Myeon office, changed the property tax amount of 3,66 won as stated in the first term portion of the property tax payment in February 7, 1981 to 2,820 won by Nonparty 1 at the request of Nonparty 1 in the 1980, and then prepare a family situation where Nonparty 1's property tax was falsely stated as 2,820 won and deliver it to the Dong, he would be subject to the disposition of exemption from convening defense, and the original copy of the property tax ledger of Nonparty 1 in order to conceal the above misconduct was reversed, and instead, the plaintiff compiled the tax ledger in which the property tax was recorded as 2,820 won.

In light of the above facts, the defendant's dismissal disposition of this case constitutes a violation of the duty of good faith under Article 48 of the Local Public Officials Act, and the defendant's dismissal disposition of the plaintiff does not deviate from the scope of discretion of disciplinary action, such as the theory of appeal, and the precedents of the lawsuit are not appropriate in this case. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below which maintained the defendant's removal disposition of this case is justified.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Lee Sung-soo (Presiding Justice)