1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the part which is dismissed or added as follows. Thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. Even if the Plaintiff committed an act identical to the grounds for the instant disposition, even if the Plaintiff committed an act identical to that of the instant disposition, the instant disposition, based on which the Plaintiff took a disciplinary action, which was either strengthened or implemented after the instant violation, or the comprehensive measures to eradicate sexual assault, is deemed to have violated the principle of self-defense, the principle of equality, the principle of prohibition of retroactive legislation, the principle of protection of trust, and the principle of proportionality, and is unlawful. The Plaintiff violated the Defendant’s legitimate instructions, and the Plaintiff committed a repeated, repeated, collective, and explicit violations on several occasions, unlike having the Plaintiff maintained active duty service. Fifth, it was acknowledged that the Plaintiff’s act of taking disciplinary action was against the Plaintiff during his or her husband’s exercise of discretionary authority, and that the Plaintiff was not aware of the grounds for the instant disciplinary action, which became final and conclusive during his or her marriage, and that it was inappropriate for the Plaintiff to refer the Plaintiff’s exercise of discretionary authority against him or her.