1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Since being appointed on June 1, 1978, the Plaintiff served as a public educational official.

The Plaintiff served as the principal of L Middle School from March 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017.

B. On October 2016, teachers working for Lmiddle Schools submitted a petition to the Office of Education for the Plaintiff’s misconduct.

C. Accordingly, the Office of Education of Gyeongnam-do conducted an audit of the misconduct related to the Plaintiff, and Defendant J and K investigated the Plaintiff’s misconduct.

The Office of Education of Gyeongnam-do held the Audit Disposition Council on December 15, 2016 based on the audit results.

M as the chairperson, N and Defendant B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I were the members of the Committee, and Defendant K was the auditor and the investigator, and Defendant J andO participated in the Audit and Disposal Council as the investigator.

As a result of deliberation, the Audit and Inspection Committee decided to request the resolution of heavy disciplinary action and imposition of disciplinary surcharge (three times) against the plaintiff.

E. On December 27, 2016, the Superintendent of the Provincial Office of Education requested the Chairperson of the General Disciplinary Committee on Public Educational Officials and the Chairperson of the General Disciplinary Committee on the Plaintiff to make a decision on heavy disciplinary action against the Plaintiff and imposing disciplinary additional charges (three times).

F. On March 20, 2017, on the ground that the Plaintiff violated Article 56 (Duty of Fidelity) and Article 63 (Duty of Maintenance of Dignity) of the State Public Officials Act, the ordinary disciplinary committee of the Gyeongnam-do decided to take disciplinary action against the Plaintiff for three months of suspension from office under Article 78 (1) of the State Public Officials Act, and to impose a surcharge of KRW 935,100, which is three times the amount of disciplinary action under Article 78-2 (1) of the State Public Officials Act. Accordingly, on March 31, 2017, the Gyeongnam-do Superintendent of the Gyeongnam-do Office of Education imposed a disciplinary action against the Plaintiff for three months of suspension from office and a surcharge of KRW 935,100, which is three times

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, 12, 15, Eul evidence 1, 2 and 44, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s deliberation and resolution by the audit and inspection council is unlawful as the following procedural defects are found to exist.

Illegal Audit Disposition Council.