logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.11.29 2019누50955
해임처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

(1) The reasoning for the judgment of this court shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Shebly, even if it is not bound by the finding of facts in a criminal trial, the fact that the criminal judgment already finalized on the same factual basis is a flexible evidence, and thus, it is difficult to adopt a factual judgment in the criminal trial in light of other evidence submitted in the civil or administrative trial, unless there are special circumstances to deem it difficult to adopt a factual judgment in the civil or administrative trial.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2011Du28240 Decided May 24, 2012). In light of the circumstances, etc. of the Plaintiff’s confessions all the facts charged at an appellate trial in a criminal trial, it is difficult to recognize the facts that the Defendant was guilty of the final and conclusive criminal judgment in the instant case.

In light of the fact that the Plaintiff was subject to a one-month disposition of suspension from office around December 2007, and the Plaintiff’s talks about the advertisement agency’s employees from November 2015 to December 2012, etc., it is difficult to view the instant disposition as an illegal disposition that deviates from and abused discretion by violating the proportionality doctrine.

Then, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed due to the lack of reason.

Since the judgment of the first instance is consistent with this conclusion, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is groundless.

arrow