1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal, including the costs of supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation of the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance is that the "private bus number" of No. 13, No. 5, on the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, is dismissed as "private bus number", and that of the plaintiff's new argument in the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the judgment as described in the following Paragraph 2, and therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article

2. The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff’s additional determination does not constitute a justifiable ground for disciplinary action as part of the legitimate trade union’s activities, and that the Plaintiff violated the provisions of collective agreements in relation to the annual leave use and the Plaintiff’s non-stoping transit constitutes a ground for disciplinary action. However, the Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff’s instant disciplinary action against the Plaintiff for 14 days of suspension from office is in violation of the principle of proportionality and is excessively excessive compared to other workers, and thus, it also violates the principle of equality.

On the other hand, when a disciplinary measure is taken against a person subject to the disciplinary measure, it is at the discretion of the person having authority to take the disciplinary measure. However, if the person having authority to take the disciplinary measure is deemed to abuse the discretionary power because the person having authority to take the disciplinary measure has considerably lost validity under the social norms, the disciplinary measure can be deemed unlawful, and if the disciplinary measure is deemed to be an unlawful measure beyond the scope of discretionary power, the contents and nature of the offense causing the disciplinary measure, the purpose of the disciplinary measure to achieve by the disciplinary measure, and the criteria for the disciplinary measure, etc., are considered to be objectively unreasonable.