1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 1, 2012, the Plaintiff passed a competitive examination for the appointment of career public officials in technical service in C-gu, 201 (hereinafter “instant examination”), and was appointed as Grade C 10 Local Chowon on January 1, 2012.

B. On May 21, 2012, according to the Defendant’s self-audit result, the CG personnel committee decided to revoke appointment on the ground that the Plaintiff’s act of making a false move-in report at the instant examination and submitting a certified copy or abstract of resident registration recorded therein constitutes an act that affects the Defendant’s or another person’s examination result by other unlawful means pursuant to Article 65(1)6 of the former Decree on the Appointment of Local Public Officials (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26640, Nov. 18, 2015; hereinafter the same shall apply). The C head of the C decided to revoke appointment on the ground that the act was an act that

(hereinafter referred to as "the previous disposition of this case")

On January 3, 2013, the Plaintiff appealed and filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the previous disposition, and the Seoul Administrative Court revoked the previous disposition on October 10, 2013 on the ground that “The grounds for the previous disposition are recognized as having been subject to prior notification and hearing of opinions under the Administrative Procedures Act, but are illegal by the Defendant without being subject to prior notification and hearing of opinions under the Administrative Procedures Act.”

(Seoul Administrative Court 2013Guhap2777). D.

C The head of the Gu appealed against it, but was dismissed on April 23, 2014, and again appealed, but the appeal was dismissed on August 20, 2014, which became final and conclusive as it was.

E. On September 17, 2014, the head of C issued the previous disposition ex officio, and followed the submission of opinions and hearing of opinions, and thereafter, on October 13, 2014, upon the decision of revocation of appointment by the C-Gu Personnel Committee, he/she revoked appointment again to the Plaintiff on October 13, 2014.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry in Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The argument and judgment.