1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows 2 between the 10th judgment of the court of first instance and the 10th judgment of the court of first instance and the 2nd judgment of the court of second instance.

In addition to the content of the Blanket proposal, the following 2-B in 10 pages 13

In addition to adding the contents of paragraph 6, it is identical to the entry of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. The addition;

A. (The defendant asserts that, as long as the plaintiff is in the position of the audit and inspection officer in the position of the audit and inspection officer, it shall be reprimanded in the first order as a person in charge of misconduct in the personnel regulations in the company in charge of audit and inspection, so that it cannot be deemed that he abused discretion because he was seriously punished compared with J, which is not an audit and inspection officer, but a general employee. However, the audit and inspection officer is only assigned to the team members of the department in charge of audit and inspection corresponding to Grades III through V in the management position, and therefore a disciplinary decision should be determined according to the nature of the work and the degree related to the work rather than any such position. Thus, as long as the plaintiff is in the position of the audit and inspection officer, he is in charge of the management of the attendance of his employees on his own computer, and his work is conducted in the form of reporting it to the plaintiff who is the team leader, it shall be deemed that the plaintiff is subject to the second reprimand as a person in charge of misconduct, and the plaintiff is in conformity with the criteria for

B. Although the Plaintiff had the power of disciplinary action nine times prior to the instant demotion, it does not correspond to the types of disciplinary action stipulated in Article 55 of the Defendant’s Personnel Management Regulations, but is not subject to minor disciplinary action, such as reprimand, salary reduction, etc., on three occasions, and most of them have passed for a considerable period of time, and thus, it is likely that the Plaintiff would have already become a disciplinary action as data of the previous disciplinary action.

3. If so, the defendant's appeal is reasonable.