1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The reasons for this part of the disposition are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. Considering the fact that the Plaintiff allegedly made the instant report by simple mistake, the Plaintiff already received a disposition of a fine for negligence from the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do on the ground of the instant report, the Plaintiff’s grade was not increased, the Plaintiff did not utilize the Plaintiff’s career subject to the instant report as a bidding, the Plaintiff’s disposition and the Plaintiff’s affiliated company were very disadvantageous to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s affiliated company, and the Defendant exempted a person who voluntarily reported a construction engineer’s false career from the disposition of this case from July 31, 2018 to January 31, 2019, etc., the instant disposition was an abuse of discretionary authority in violation of the proportionality and the principle of equality.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. 1) From June 25, 1987 to September 30, 2014, the Plaintiff was employed as a public official in technical service (civil engineering) at the Bupyeong-gu Office of Seocheon-gu and Seocheon-gu. On December 8, 2014, the Plaintiff entered H on May 15, 2014, and reported 79 construction engineers’ career to B Association, including the work experience subject to the instant report.

3) On March 6, 2018, the president of the Association deleted the work experience subject to the instant report. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s recognition date for each work field was deleted from 7,775 days to 91 days, and the recognition date for each work field was reduced to 6,784 days, and the recognition date for each work field was reduced as follows. There is a difference between the total number of recognition days for each work field and the total number of recognition days for each work field. This is because, in the event that the participation period for each work field overlaps, the number of recognition days is cut below the decimal point when calculating the number of recognition days.