1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit is resulting from the supplementary participation.

1. The part citing the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the part corresponding to the face 2 through 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the part concerning the reasoning for which the court concerning this case is based, the background of the decision of the retrial of this case, the plaintiff's assertion, and the relevant statutes and regulations, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 4

In addition, "the fact that the first instance court made a ruling on a change" in the fourth sentence of the fifth sentence is "the fact that the ruling was made on a change, and it did not give an opportunity to vindicate under Article 50 of the Personnel Regulations."

2. Judgment on the legitimacy of disciplinary proceedings

A. If a person to be disciplined is subject to disciplinary action in violation of the disciplinary procedure even though he/she had been given an opportunity to present himself/herself in the disciplinary committee to vindicate himself/herself and present explanatory materials, the exercise of such disciplinary right should be deemed null and void against the justice in the procedure regardless of whether the grounds for disciplinary action are recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2010Da100919, Jan. 27, 2012; 90Da8077, Jul. 9, 191). 2) If the disciplinary action provides that prior notice and granting of right to make statements as a mandatory provision, it is necessary to ensure the objectivity and fairness of the disciplinary action, and thus, it is objectively clear that the content of the grounds for disciplinary action is objectively clear.

Even if a person to be disciplined has already asserted the legitimacy of his act in other proceedings, the disciplinary action will be null and void unless the prior notice is given.

B. (See Supreme Court Decision 92Da14786 delivered on July 28, 1992).

Facts of recognition

(1) Article 50 of the Personnel Regulations of the Plaintiff shall apply mutatis mutandis to the case where the board of directors makes a decision on disciplinary action, “A discipline accused person shall be notified by submitting a explanatory statement or a notice of attendance at the board of directors in accordance with subparagraph 10 (paragraph (1)) seven days before the date on which the board of directors holds the meeting.”