1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The grounds for the court’s explanation concerning this case are as follows: (a) the pertinent part of the judgment of the first instance is amended as stated in the following 2; and (b) the reason for the judgment of the first instance (including the attachment, but excluding the part regarding “4. conclusion”) is the same as the part concerning the reason for the judgment of the first instance except for the addition of the corresponding “related Acts and subordinate statutes” to the attached part of “related Acts and subordinate statutes” as stated in the attached Table of this judgment; and (c) thus

2. The parts to be modified are 1-b) the main sentence of two pages; and

"from January 10, 2015 to January 12, 2015, the first and the third pages of the Table shall be "from January 10, 2015 to January 12, 2015" respectively.

2. Main sentence 1-2

The two parallels of the ports " January 10, 2015" shall be " January 9, 2015".

2. Main sentence 1-2

The fourth parallel " January 12, 2015" among the ports shall be changed to " January 11, 2015".

4 The following shall be added to the left side of the 4th parallel "Gu":

【The purport of Article 61(1) of the State Public Officials Act provides that “A public official shall not give or receive any case, donation or entertainment, directly or indirectly, in connection with his/her duties,” is not to prevent a public official from committing an unlawful act in connection with his/her duties in return for an unlawful request in advance, but to prevent the act of receiving money or goods related to his/her duties without any prior illegal request, or the time of receiving money or goods, etc., in order to protect the integrity of the public official and the impossibility of performing his/her duties, and to ensure the appropriateness of the public official’s performance of duties (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Du11813, Nov. 12, 2004); and the following contents are added under the fourth seven acts of performing his/her duties.

In addition, in the administrative litigation disputing the legitimacy of disciplinary action, the burden of proof on the grounds of disciplinary action has the burden of proof to the defendant who asserts the legality of the action.

However, the fact is proved in civil or administrative litigation.