The defendant's demotion made against the plaintiff on September 4, 2017 shall be revoked.

Costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff was appointed as an administrative assistant (Grade VII) on April 11, 2014, and served as C in the office of the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries from September 1, 2015 to May 2, 2017.

On May 2, 2017, the Defendant requested the Central Disciplinary Committee to make a decision on heavy disciplinary action against the Plaintiff for the following reasons (hereinafter “instant misconduct”).

On April 17, 2017, the Plaintiff distorted the fact that the reporter did not confirm by linking the issue of the specific candidate and reorganization (establishment, etc. of the H office) with the reporter in the process of requesting the D Press E to cooperate with the reporter on a telephone on April 17, 2017, such as “I have a right to go to the candidate G,” and “H promise is also included in the He promise.” The Plaintiff’s act constitutes a violation of Article 56 (Duty of Good Faith) and Article 63 (Duty of Maintenance, etc.) of the State Public Officials Act and constitutes Article 78 (1) of the same Act.

On July 14, 2017, the Central Disciplinary Committee decided to select a disciplinary measure of suspension from office against the plaintiff, but to reduce it for one month of salary reduction in consideration of the achievements of the commendation of the Minister of Oceans and Fisheries.

(hereinafter “Initial Resolution”). The Defendant requested review to the Central Disciplinary Committee on August 18, 2017, deeming that the initial decision was less than the instant misconduct, and the Central Disciplinary Committee re-decided the Plaintiff by force, etc. on August 18, 2017.

(hereinafter referred to as “re-resolution.” The Defendant made a demotion to the Plaintiff on September 4, 2017, according to the re-resolution.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). On September 28, 2017, the Plaintiff appealed to the instant disposition and filed an appeal review with the Ministry of Personnel Management, but the appeals review committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s request on December 27, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 5 to 7.