1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

On August 12, 2013, the Plaintiff was appointed as Grade 9 driver's assistant in technical service, and served in the Btax affairs support division for January 11, 2015, from January 12, 2015 to January 14, 2016, from C's operational support division, from January 15, 2016 to March 23, 2016, and from January 15, 2016 to March 23, 2016.

On November 2, 2015, the Plaintiff left his workplace for personal purposes at around 10:10.

On November 2, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) driven a pipe car on November 15, 2015; and (b) stolen goods worth KRW 528,800, in total, 4 points, including electric type car 1, 5 type car 1, 5 type car 1, 5 type car 1, and 28,800 from E store.

The plaintiff, who is a new driver for three years, was dismissed from time to time, or left the office arbitrarily by using official cars for private application.

In the course of the investigation, the plaintiff tried to keep the situation consistent with his defense and to delete the situation of false speech.

The Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff on March 24, 2016 pursuant to Article 78(1) of the State Public Officials Act, on the grounds that the Plaintiff violated Article 56 (Duty of Fidelity), Article 58 (Prohibition of Deserting from Office), Article 63 (Duty of Confidentiality), Article 13 (Prohibition of Private Use of and Benefit from Public Goods) of the Code of Conduct for Public Officials, and Article 31 (Duty of Fidelity) of the Code of Conduct for Public Officials of the National Tax Service as follows:

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff claimed an appeal review against this, but the appeals review committee rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim on July 5, 2016.

【Non-contentious facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the entire argument as to whether the disposition of this case is legitimate, it does not mean that the plaintiff dismissed the office from time to time and left the office.

In addition, the plaintiff's thief was contingent, and the actual amount of damage was 380,00 won at the time of the discount or compensation, which was 528,00 won at the time of the discount, and the suspension of indictment was imposed.