1. Defendant Republic of Korea: 33,481,090 won to the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from August 2, 2018 to December 5, 2018.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On February 26, 1992, the Plaintiff was appointed as a police officer on July 1, 1998, and retired as a matter of course from office on July 1, 1998, on the slope on May 20, 1996, on April 7, 200, and on July 1, 2017.

B. On April 20, 2016, the Plaintiff was detained on suspicion of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes Act”) (Bribery) (hereinafter “Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes”), when he/she worked in the Daegu Middle Police Station B.

C. On May 10, 2016, the Daegu District Prosecutor’s Office notified the result of the public official’s disposition to the effect that Defendant Daegu District Police Agency commenced an investigation into the Plaintiff, and then prosecuted the Plaintiff for violation of the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act (Bribery).

On November 2008, the Plaintiff received a bribe of approximately KRW 50 million in cash sent by E, while taking charge of investigation into financial multi-level and habitual fraud cases, such as E, at the Daegu Regional Police Agency C Team, along with D, etc.

Results of disposition: On May 6, 2016, the old trial on detention.

D. Accordingly, on May 13, 2016, the Commissioner of the Local Police Agency of Daegu notified the Plaintiff that his position should be removed pursuant to Article 78-3(1)4 of the State Public Officials Act.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). On June 14, 2016, the Commissioner of the Local Police Agency of Daegu notified the Plaintiff that the “Article 78-3(1)4 of the State Public Officials Act” under the relevant Act and subordinate statutes is a clerical error under Article 73-3(1)4 of the State Public Officials Act.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Eul's statement of No. 1, and the purport of whole pleading

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The instant disposition constitutes abrupt invalidation, as follows, of the significant and objective reason for its illegality.

Therefore, Defendant Republic of Korea shall compensate the Plaintiff for damages caused by the ipso facto null and void disposition, i.e., ① wages and bonuses not paid due to dismissal from position, etc., 3,481.