1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be revoked.

Details of the disposition

On October 13, 2006, the Plaintiff was appointed as a local assistant inspector (class 10) at the office of education of Gyeongnam-do.

From April 1, 2014 to December 31, 2016, the Plaintiff served as a local facility manager at the E elementary school located in Yangsan-si D from January 1, 2017 to June 30, 2017.

On January 31, 2017, the Defendant received an audit request from the head of the Education Office of Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, and audited the Plaintiff from May 25, 2017 to June 7, 2017.

On September 6, 2017, the defendant requested the personnel committee for local public officials of the office of education to adopt a heavy disciplinary measure against the plaintiff on the ground of the result of the audit. On October 18, 2017, the personnel committee for local public officials of the office of education in the office of education in Gyeonggi-do decided to dismiss the plaintiff on the ground of each misconduct stated in the table of "the grounds for disciplinary action and judgment" attached to attached Table 1.

On October 30, 2017, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the disciplinary measure of dismissal.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). On November 13, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an appeal review with the Educational Appeals Review Committee (Seoul-do), but was dismissed on December 22, 2017.

【The Plaintiff’s claim on the lawfulness of the instant disposition is unlawful on the following grounds: (a) there is no dispute; (b) the entry of Eul No. 1 (including a paper number; hereinafter the same shall apply); and (c) the purport of the entire pleading.

In light of the fact that the defendant was not informed at all of the plaintiff while conducting an audit on the grounds for disposition of this case, the defendant did not give sufficient opportunity to explain to the plaintiff in that process, and the face-to-face meeting with the person who filed a civil petition against the plaintiff did not proceed, and the evidence and arguments submitted by the plaintiff are not sufficiently reflected, the audit conducted by the defendant is unfair and biased.

Therefore, the instant disposition based on the above audit is unlawful.

[Attachment 1] The grounds for disciplinary action are specified.