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, as a public official belonging to the Defendant, served in Han Gyeong Library from November 2013 to August 2014, and thereafter in Chocheon Library, respectively.

B. From January 2014 to March 2015, the Defendant discovered the fact that the Plaintiff had his fingerprinted out of the place of work on a total of 120 occasions (21,290 minutes) at the search library or the friendship library (21,290 minutes).

Accordingly, on April 2014, the planning and audit and inspection department under the Defendant’s affiliated therewith conducted an investigation against the Plaintiff. At the time, the Plaintiff stated to the effect that, unlike the actual working hours, a total of 80 times, 14,409 minutes ( approximately 240 hours) were unfairly fingerprinted.

C. After the review of relevant data, the planning and audit and inspection department requested the first personnel committee of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province to adopt fingerprints as if the Plaintiff had worked more than 194 hours in excess of the actual overtime hours and to adopt an unfair receipt of overtime work allowances.

On September 11, 2015, the First Personnel Committee of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province decided on a one-month disciplinary measure against the Plaintiff, taking into account the relevant circumstances. On October 5 of the same year, the Defendant issued a disposition of salary reduction for one month (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Articles 48 and 69(1) of the Local Public Officials Act on the ground that the Plaintiff was unfairly receiving excess work allowances.

(In relation to the above disposition, the Defendant imposed KRW 5,197,260 on the Plaintiff on May 3, 2016, under the pretext of the amount of excessive service allowance received and the additional dues). [Grounds for recognition]] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including additional number), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The defendant asserted that the plaintiff had his fingerprinted at a library other than the next place of work, where the plaintiff actually worked in excess according to the night and holiday work schedule, etc.