1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff was appointed as Chigh School Teachers on September 1, 1987, and served as D High School Teachers from March 1, 2006.

B. A disciplinary action against the plaintiff shall not be taken by improper means when applying for a screening examination.

Nevertheless, on July 11, 2012, the Plaintiff recruited to share the amount of KRW 10 million on the condition that the questions to be drawn up for the screening examination (e.g., debate and interview problems) are received prior to the evaluation by teachers E working at D High Schools.

In addition, the plaintiff received E prior to the evaluation of the essay questions (6) to be drawn up for the examination for the examination, applied for the first written evaluation on July 14, 2012, and was selected as a person subject to the second competence evaluation.

Then, on July 24, 2012, the Plaintiff calls for 30 million won from teachers E to “A with a view to being subject to prior interview questions.” The Plaintiff hears words “A with a view to 15 million won.”

7. 24. School Teachers E provided money and valuables worth KRW 15 million in the future.

On June 3, 2013, the Defendant requested the General Disciplinary Committee of Public Educational Officials to make a resolution on the disciplinary action against the Plaintiff and the disciplinary surcharge three times. On July 26, 2013, the Defendant issued a dismissal and imposition of one-time (15 million won) of the disciplinary surcharge (hereinafter “instant disciplinary surcharge”) under Articles 78 and 78-2 of the State Public Officials Act on the ground that the Plaintiff committed the following misconduct (hereinafter “instant misconduct”) and violated Articles 56 (Duty of Fidelity), 61 (Duty of Integrity), and 63 (Duty of Integrity) of the State Public Officials Act.

C. On August 16, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an appeal to the Appeal Commission for Teachers’ Appeal seeking the instant dismissal and the revocation of the imposition of surcharges for disciplinary action.