logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.06.19 2015구합53008
파면처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff was appointed as a civil engineering officer (Grade V) on April 29, 191, and served in the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs’s location plan, the Ministry of Construction and Transportation’s urban management department, etc., and promoted to the facility secretariat (Grade IV) on February 3, 2001 through the Ministry of Construction and Transportation, the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs’s Road Policy Office D from October 1, 2008 to December 6, 2009, and the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs’s Road Policy Office E from December 7, 2009 to March 7, 2010, while serving as the road policy officer from March 8, 2010 to the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs’s Road Policy Office E.

B. On October 12, 2009, the Defendant was selected as a member of the Design Evaluation Committee of the G Road Act (hereinafter “instant construction”) on which the Plaintiff had been employed as D, and was asked by the Director of the Construction Site Headquarters H to give more favorable points to competitors in the design evaluation of the instant construction project. On October 16, 2009, the Defendant granted first-class design evaluation points to the consortium at the time of the participation company’s design deliberation and evaluation, and thereafter received KRW 20 million in cash from H on March 3, 2010 in return for the successful bid for the construction project, and then requested a disciplinary committee against the Plaintiff on January 3, 2013, and the Central Disciplinary Committee dismissed the Plaintiff from office on March 7, 2014 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. On March 25, 2014, the Defendant issued a disciplinary measure against the Plaintiff (e.g., dismissal) (hereinafter “instant measure”) and issued a written explanation of the grounds for the disciplinary measure to the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal with the appeals review committee on April 8, 2014. However, the appeals review committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on October 20, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is from H.

arrow