logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.04.13 2017구합69496
해임처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Details of the disposition

After being appointed as the head of a tax office on March 1, 1991, the Plaintiff promoted to the Director of the Tax Office on December 28, 2007, and served in the Daegu Regional Tax Office B from February 26, 2009 to February 27, 2011, in the Ansan-dong Tax Office C and the Port Tax Office D from February 28, 201 to February 19, 201, and in the Ansan-dong Tax Office D from February 28, 201 to February 19, 2014, respectively, until the dismissal from office.

On December 1, 2016, the National Tax Service General Disciplinary Committee decided two times (the amount subject to disciplinary charges: 641,000 won) of the Plaintiff’s dismissal and disciplinary charges (the amount subject to disciplinary charges) due to the following reasons and determination.

On June 2009, the Plaintiff received KRW 5 million from the Grade 6 F working in the Gangnam Tax Department at the end of the end of the month, along with the request of the Plaintiff to assist in the tax affairs of G.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant dispute 1”). In reviewing the return of capital gains tax reported by H, a dubed son of G, the transfer income tax of KRW 189,511,160 should be imposed; however, there was a fact that the tax was excessively collected by requiring the revised return to pay KRW 50,886,160.

(2) On March 1, 201, the Plaintiff received money and other valuables and entertainments worth KRW 641,000 in total on three occasions, including meal entertainment of KRW 45,00 and gift certificates of KRW 300,00 on April 201 and KRW 55,000 in total, around March 4, 201, from G that became aware of in relation to tax counseling in the course of performing his/her duties in Ansan Tax Office in 2009.

(2) In order to prevent the recurrence of similar cases and to establish public service discipline, it is desirable for the Plaintiff to receive KRW 5 million from F, even if the Plaintiff violated Article 61 of the State Public Officials Act and Article 15 of the Code of Conduct for Public Officials of the National Tax Service (limited to the act of receiving money and other valuables).

arrow