beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
Reasons
1. The issue of this case and the citing the judgment of the court of first instance
A. The key issue of the instant case is whether the instant disciplinary action was the unlawful disposition that abused discretionary power and the amount of consolation money.
B. As to this, the first and second disciplinary actions in the instant case constitute an unlawful disposition that abused discretionary power, and it is apparent that this constitutes a tort against the Plaintiff, and thereafter, the court determined that the amount of consolation money to be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff is KRW 20,000,000.
However, the first instance court determined that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone cannot be deemed to constitute a tort on the third and fourth disciplinary action of this case and the change of the job of this case.
C. Furthermore, attached Table 2(1) of the Rules on Disciplinary Action, etc. of Public Educational Officials
1.(c)
The criteria for disciplinary action are determined as dismissal of a disciplinary action when the degree of the misconduct is serious, gross negligence, or when the degree of misconduct is weak and intentional. However, the first disciplinary action (Dismissal) by the Teachers' Appeal Committee is revoked on the ground that it is unlawful because it considerably deviatess from and abused discretionary power compared to the Plaintiff's two suspicions of misconducts in completing online training on the part of the Plaintiff. The Defendant was subject to the second disciplinary action for the 1-month period of salary reduction for the above 2 online training completion, but the teachers' Appeal Committee made a decision to change the salary reduction disposition for the 1-month period of salary reduction for the said 2 online training completion, on the ground that it is judged that the above fact of recognition alone is insufficient to reverse the determination that the first and second disciplinary action constitutes an illegal disposition that has abused discretionary power. Therefore, the above determination by the first instance court is justifiable.
Therefore, the court's explanation on the instant case.