1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Defendant’s removal from office against the Plaintiff on September 4, 2017 is revoked.

(2) A complaint;

1. The reasons for the court’s explanation on this part are as follows: (a) except for the addition of “Seoul Central District Court (2016 Gohap646)” to “Seoul Central District Court (2016 Gohap646),” the corresponding part of the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance (2) is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (2nd 3 to 4nd 1st ). Therefore, this is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The instant disposition is unlawful on the grounds delineated below the Plaintiff’s assertion.

Article 2(1) [Attachment 1] of the Enforcement Rule of the former Enforcement Rule of the Act on Disciplinary Action against Public Officials and Article 23 [Attachment 2] of the former Guidelines for the Operation of the Code of Conduct for Public Officials (hereinafter referred to as the "Guidelines for the Disciplinary Action of this case") do not clearly specify whether the above provisions are limited to the part related to one's duties or include any case related to another's duties, and thus abstract and ambiguous. In addition, in the event that money and valuables are provided in relation to one's duties and no illegal disposition is made, it does not distinguish whether the act is a passive act when receiving at least five million won, and the degree of illegality is different. Thus, the disposition of this case in accordance with the Discipline Criteria of this case was uniformly made invalid.

B. The instant disciplinary standard is applicable only to the receipt of money and valuables, etc. in relation to the duties of a public official by taking advantage of one’s own status or one’s own status.

Although it is recognized that the Plaintiff received money and valuables, this case’s relevant criminal judgment does not violate the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Good Offices Acceptance) but does not accept money and valuables from other public officials by taking advantage of the “self-reliance duties” or “self-reliance duties.” Thus, the instant disposition does not have any grounds for disposition.

(c).