beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s dismissal disposition against Plaintiff B on December 2, 2014 is revoked.
2. The plaintiff A and C's claims respectively.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On August 29, 1978, Plaintiff A was appointed as a local administrative secretary for D military administration and served as a head of D military administrative support division (administrative class V) from July 29, 201 to July 3, 2014; Plaintiff B was appointed as a local administrative secretary for D military administration on June 2, 1992 and served as D military administrative support and administrative assistant (administrative class VI) from July 2, 2013 to July 3, 2014; Plaintiff C was appointed as a local administrative secretary for D military administration on October 2004 and served as an administrative support and administrative assistant (administrative class VII) from February 7, 2013 to July 3, 2014.
B. On November 14, 2014, the Governor of the Jeollabuk-do Personnel Committee decided on the dismissal of Plaintiff A due to the following disciplinary reasons. Accordingly, on December 2, 2014, the Defendant issued a disciplinary measure against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant dismissal disposition”).
▣ 징계사유(이하 ‘이 사건 징계사유’라 하고, 순번으로 특정한다)
1. On January 28, 2014, Plaintiff A, while holding a meeting of work performance rating and disturbing deceptive order, knew that he/she was the head of the office division and the head of the Gun who is the inspector, who is an appraiser of the service performance rating authority of public officials under his/her jurisdiction, while conducting work performance rating for employees at Grade VI or below in the second half of the second half of the 2014, he/she did not reflect all of the final confirmations determined by the head of the Gun through consultation with the head of the office division, but did not reflect some (50~60%) in the work performance rating review materials, and had the head of the Gun obtain approval on January 27, 2014. The next day (17:00 on January 28, 2014) by holding a meeting of the work performance rating committee, and presented opinions so that the order separately indicated by the chairperson can be reflected in the remarks column of the meeting materials, which is not the final confirmation person’s opinion, but is the head of the Gun.