1. The Defendant’s disposition of expulsion against the Plaintiff on August 10, 2018 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 13, 2018, the Plaintiff was elected as a member of the Busan Metropolitan City Council in the 7th nationwide provincial election.

B. On July 31, 2018, C et al., who held office as a member of the Busan Metropolitan Council, requested the Defendant’s Speaker to take disciplinary action against the Plaintiff on the grounds that “the Plaintiff violated the duty to maintain dignity under Article 36 of the Local Autonomy Act with respect to the recent press reports,” and simultaneously proposed a resolution of the Special Committee on Ethics to examine the grounds for disciplinary action.

C. The Defendant, which was held on July 31, 2018, proposed and resolved a resolution on the composition of the Special Committee on Ethics for the Plaintiff’s Disciplinary Action (at least three persons, two persons, two persons, one person, and one person) by the Second Operating General Committee, which was held on July 31, 2018. On August 9, 2018, the second meeting of the Special Committee on Ethics was held, and the resolution was made as a result of the examination of disciplinary action against the Plaintiff at the said meeting.

On August 10, 2018, the defendant referred to the disciplinary proposal against the plaintiff at the second plenary session of the 270 extraordinary session, and presented his opinion that the disciplinary action against the plaintiff should be decided as an expulsion at the plenary session, and then the disciplinary action against the plaintiff was decided under Article 88 (1) 4 of the Local Autonomy Act (contest: six persons, dissenting persons:0 persons).

(hereinafter referred to as “instant expulsion disposition”). (e)

On August 13, 2018, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the instant expulsion disposition, and filed the instant lawsuit on September 12, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 evidence, Eul 4 evidence (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s 1 procedural unlawful assertion ① The instant expulsion disposition did not specify the grounds for the relevant disciplinary action. Accordingly, the procedures were not duly followed, as the fact-finding on the grounds for the disciplinary action, the notification to the Plaintiff, the provision of an opportunity to vindicate the Plaintiff, and the notification procedures of the grounds for the disposition.