1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

The plaintiff is appointed on August 31, 1991 and is on duty as a local administrative assistant (class 6 of administration) in the B-Gun Urban Administration Department.

In accordance with Article 55 of the Local Public Officials Act, Article 1-2 of the Local Public Officials Service Regulations, Article 69(1) of the Local Public Officials Act, Article 8 of the Local Public Officials Discipline and Appeal Regulations, and Article 5(1) of the Local Public Officials Discipline Regulations, the Defendant was subject to a disciplinary measure for one month of salary reduction, on the ground that the Defendant violated Article 55 of the Local Public Officials Act, Article 1-2 of the Local Public Officials Service Regulations, and Article 4

On December 2017, the summary of the suspicion of the reason for the resolution of the public official disciplinary action caused the deepening conflict in the organization by posting different contents from the fact.

This is a public official who violates the duty prescribed in Article 5 (Duty to Maintain Dignity) of the Local Public Officials Act, Article 1-2 of the Regulations on the Service of Local Public Officials, and Article 4 of the B-Gun Ordinance on the Service of Local Public Officials (hereinafter referred to as the "Ordinance of this case"). The reason for disciplinary action under Article 69 (1) of the Local Public Officials Act constitutes a reason for disciplinary action under Article 2 of the Local Public Officials Discipline and Appeal Regulations.

Judgment

In addition, the review act of the plaintiff is in a decent and exaggerated part of personal appraisal.

In addition, it is more likely to undermine the trust of residents in administration by having doubts about the fairness, neutrality, prudence, etc. of the entire administrative organization as well as local residents and Dong officials in itself, and such an act can be said to constitute an act that damages the prestige or dignity of a public official.

In addition, in consideration of the fact that the freedom of expression in SNS (SNS), and the impact of social relation network services on the community is considerable, the act of the suspect is the act of the suspect.