1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part seeking the revocation of a disposition that was made on November 1, 2019 shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remainder.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 1, 2009, the Plaintiff was selected on October 1, 2019 by the Committee for Selection of Officers Eligible for Promotion, who served as Second Lieutenant, and was published on July 2, 2018.

B. On September 16, 2019, the head of the 55th volunteer soldier’s group issued a disciplinary action for three months of suspension from office (hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”) on the ground of the Plaintiff’s breach of good faith (the abuse of authority). On September 17, 2019, the Army Chief of Staff notified the Plaintiff on September 17, 2019 that “The Plaintiff would be required to delete the Plaintiff from the list of prospective candidates for promotion pursuant to Article 31 of the Military Personnel Management Act and Article 38 of the Enforcement Decree of the Military Personnel Management Act” and that “the Plaintiff will submit opinions by September 23, 2019.”

C. On September 27, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition to delete the list of prospective candidates for promotion to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”). On the same day, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the instant disposition on the website of the Ministry of National Defense, and requested the Plaintiff to submit the “written confirmation” and “written consent by means of electronic document,” but the Plaintiff rejected the instant disposition.

On the other hand, on September 18, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Suwon District Court for the suspension of the validity of the instant disciplinary action. On September 30, 2019, the Suwon District Court, upon the Plaintiff’s application, rendered a decision that “the validity of the instant disciplinary action is suspended by 14 days after the pronouncement of the judgment on the revocation of the suspension of office (2019Guhap71609)” (No. 2019Guhap3842). The Plaintiff submitted a written decision on the suspension of execution to the head office in charge of the Army and requested the revocation of the instant disciplinary action. However, on November 1, 2019, the Plaintiff received verbal communication from the person in charge of the headquarters in charge of the said Army headquarters that the Defendant was not able to approve the selection of the so-called Jindon

(hereinafter referred to as “instant notification”). [The grounds for recognition] There is no dispute, and evidence Nos. 1 through 6.