beta
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 is a police officer who was appointed as a policeman on August 30, 1986 and served as a chief of the National Police Agency B police agencies of the National Police Agency from July 16, 2016 to the Superintendent of the Educational Department of the National Police Agency after promotion on April 23, 2014.
B. On June 5, 2017, the Defendant, on March 18, 2017, committed an act falling under Article 56 (Duty of Good Faith), Article 57 (Duty of Good Faith), and Article 63 (Duty of Good Faith) of the State Public Officials Act by committing an act falling under Article 1, Article 57 (Duty of Good Faith) and Article 63 (Duty of Good Faith) of the State Public Officials Act on the ground that the Plaintiff committed a disciplinary action against the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 78 (1) of the same Act.
(hereinafter “instant disposition”). On March 10, 2017, in the process of classifying the answer sheet by 4 persons, such as G, etc. (hereinafter “the ground for disciplinary action 1”), the head of the police station C (Employment in charge) requested four persons, including G, from March 10, 2017, to classify the answer sheet and classify the answer sheet together, the Plaintiff failed to confirm the previous seal and sent it to the examination site, thereby hindering the progress of the examination.
2. At around 09:45 on the date of the instant test, the chief of the 8 test site situation management failure (hereinafter “the ground for disciplinary action 2”) and the Plaintiff consented to the opinion of the 8 test site progress officer (revision F) that “the Plaintiff is aware of the error in distributing the answer sheet to the regional office and brought about the answer sheet to the regional office, and brought about the eight test site to the 8 test site.”
8 Although the 8th test site decided to postpone the test for 10 minutes under the circumstances where the test commences (10:00), the Plaintiff does not take measures to collect the already distributed issue in a lump sum or manage the systematic control because of lack of active advice, support, etc. for all circumstances that may be at issue, such as how to respond to the use of toilets.