1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 27, 2005, the Plaintiff was appointed to the Korea Post by the Ministry of Information and Communications as a technical Grade 10 Information and Communications Technology Board. From March 23, 2013, the Plaintiff served in the Department of Information and Communications for the Department of Information and Communications B postal items, and was promoted to the postal class 8 postal post office on August 4, 2014.

B. On November 9, 2015, on the ground that the Plaintiff committed the following misconduct and violated Articles 56 (Duty of Good Faith), 57 (Duty of Good Faith), and 58 (Prohibition of Deserting from Office) of the State Public Officials Act, the ordinary disciplinary committee decided to punish the Plaintiff for the period of two months of his/her salary reduction in accordance with Article 78 (1) of the same Act, and the Defendant was subject to the above resolution, subject to disciplinary action for the period of two months of salary reduction in the Plaintiff on November 23, 2015.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). A public official was unable to leave his/her workplace without obtaining permission or approval from his/her superior on September 8, 2015 to September 9, 2015 (Disciplinary Reason 1), and refused to comply with an order to return to work (Disciplinary Reason 2). The reason for annual leave is falsely reported to the chairperson of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Commission with the reason for annual leave and actually reported it to him/her as a meeting, and there is a fact that one person or group demonstration was conducted to oppose the delivery (Disciplinary Reason 3).

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed a request for review with the Ministry of Personnel Management, and the said appeals review committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on February 26, 2016 on the ground that the instant disciplinary action No. 3 is not deemed a cause of disciplinary action, but the instant disciplinary action No. 3 cannot be deemed a deviation or abuse of discretionary power.

(In conclusion, the grounds for the disciplinary action of this case are the grounds for the disciplinary action of this case ①, ② The grounds for the disciplinary action of this case ①, ② the grounds for the disciplinary action of this case, ② the judgment of illegality of the disposition of this case limited to the grounds for the disciplinary action of this case).

2. The defendant.