The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, as a staff member of the Army B Association’s operations leader, served as a staff member of the Army B Association’s volunteer corps from September 19, 2018 to July 15, 2019, and the Defendant is the person having authority to take disciplinary action against the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 58(1)2 of the Military Judicial Act.

B. On August 30, 2019, the Defendant held a disciplinary committee and deliberated upon the Plaintiff during the Plaintiff’s attendance. On September 10, 2019, the Defendant decided to take a disciplinary measure against the Plaintiff on September 10, 2019 [Attachment 1], i.e., a violation of the duty to maintain dignity (sexual assault, etc.), (ii) a violation of the duty to maintain good faith (a violation of another by abuse of authority), (iii) a violation of the duty to maintain confidentiality (non-disclosure of personal information), (v) a violation of the duty to maintain confidentiality (a violation of language), and (v) a violation of the duty to maintain confidentiality (hereinafter “grounds for disciplinary measure”), pursuant to Article 56 of the Military Personnel Judicial Act, on the grounds that the grounds for disciplinary measure against the Plaintiff was taken (hereinafter “original disciplinary measure”).

On September 18, 2019, the Plaintiff appealed to the Chief of Staff of the Army against the above original disciplinary action. On January 31, 2020, the Chief of Staff of the Army held an appeal review committee and decided to reduce the above disciplinary action for one month from the suspension of office on February 12, 2020 upon deliberation and resolution by the Plaintiff and his/her agents present at the meeting of the appeals review committee (the grounds for recognition) / [the grounds for recognition] The Plaintiff did not dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 18, Eul evidence No. 19, and the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is to revoke the instant disposition on the following grounds.

1) At the time of the instant disciplinary committee meeting, the Plaintiff did not directly issue a notice of attendance under Article 9 of the Military Personnel Disciplinary Decree and notified the Plaintiff of the method of issuing a notice of attendance and there is a defect in the method of issuing the notice of attendance, and the notification of attendance is in accordance with Article 21 of the Administrative Procedure Act.