The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. The following facts are either in dispute between the parties or in light of the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts can be acknowledged: Gap evidence Nos. 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6, and 8 through 10.

From March 1, 2016 to January 8, 2019, the Plaintiff is a local public official (local administrative officials) who was dispatched by the Center under the control of Busan Metropolitan City C Center (hereinafter referred to as the "C Center").

B. On January 18, 2019, the head of the DNA team working at the C Center (hereinafter “victim”) filed an appeal against sexual harassment with the C Center on the following grounds: (a) around November 11, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an appeal against sexual harassment with the C Center: (b) “Around November 11, 2016, the Plaintiff took left hand of the victim who was seated next to his previous employee, was able to take away his left arms, and continued to take off the victim’s buckbucks, and did so five to six times, and (c) the C Center Review Committee decided on February 25, 2019 that the Plaintiff’s instant act constituted sexual harassment; and (d) the Busan Metropolitan City Committee for Deliberation on Sexual Harassment on March 27, 2019 deemed that the instant act constituted sexual harassment and requested a resolution on disciplinary action.

C. On August 23, 2019, the Defendant requested a minor disciplinary decision to regard the Plaintiff’s instant misconduct as violating his/her duty to maintain dignity.

On October 15, 2019, the Busan Metropolitan Personnel Committee decided that the Plaintiff’s disciplinary action against the instant misconduct was reduced to one month, and accordingly, the Defendant issued a disciplinary action for January 7, 2019 (hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”) against the Plaintiff on November 7, 2019.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion of this case should be revoked on the grounds that the disposition of this case is unlawful on the following grounds.

(1) Considering the relationship between the Plaintiff and the victim that existed before and after the instant case, and the situation where the meeting was held at the time, the instant wrongful act was committed.