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 February 1, 1979, the Plaintiff was appointed as Jeju Special Self-Governing Province’s Local Fishery Secretary and served as Jeju Special Self-Governing Province B from January 12, 2012 to January 15, 2015.

B. On July 2015, the Audit Committee of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province conducted an audit of the duties of the Korea Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Institute of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province and demanded the Defendant to take a minor disciplinary action against the Plaintiff on the following grounds. The Defendant, following a resolution by the Personnel Committee of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province, issued a reprimand against the Plaintiff on September 3, 2015 on the ground that the Plaintiff committed the following disciplinary action, and this constitutes grounds for disciplinary action under Article 69(1)2 of the Local Public Officials Act.

C A negotiated contract was concluded with a specific business entity by arbitrarily publicly announcing the period of public announcement of the construction project (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction”).

(hereinafter “instant disciplinary cause”). The design of the instant construction project was arbitrarily modified twice to increase the construction cost.

D Business has entered into a private contract with a specific business entity by ordering it to be changed into the manufacture and purchase of goods without placing an order for the construction of facilities.

The Korea Institute of Marine Science and Technology Promotion participated in improper activities as a researcher.

A person subject to overseas training included himself/herself several times and selected a person subject to overseas training in an improper manner.

C. On September 18, 2015, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the request for review of an appeal to the Jeju Special Self-Governing Province appeals review committee. On November 18, 2015, the appeals review committee rendered a decision to revise the pertinent reprimand disposition on the ground that the remaining grounds except the instant disciplinary grounds are not recognized.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”), / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry of evidence A Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings.