beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff’s career was appointed as a local administrative secretary on September 18, 1995, and served as a public official in charge of the personnel support team for B viewing from August 12, 2013 to July 19, 2015, while serving as a public official in charge of C in charge of the personnel support team for B viewing.
B. The Defendant’s disposition 1) When the Plaintiff worked as a public official in charge of C’s personnel support team for the public official in charge of C’s affairs as above, the Plaintiff voluntarily released KRW 66,358,640 (i.e., 26,802,500 + 6,200,00 + 33,356,140) by means as follows (hereinafter “instant misconduct”).
(2) ① The Defendant, on November 10, 2015, issued a false disposition of removal (hereinafter “instant removal”) and disciplinary surcharge amounting to KRW 66,356,140,640 on the ground that the instant act of corruption falls under Article 48 and Article 69(1)2 of the Local Public Officials Act and Article 8 of the Local Public Officials Discipline and Appeal Regulations and Article 5(2) of the Rules on the Determination of Disciplinary Action against Local Public Officials at Time (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on November 10, 2015, issued a false disposition of removal from the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant removal”) and disciplinary surcharge amounting to KRW 66,358,640,640.
C. The Plaintiff filed a petition for an appeal review with respect to the Defendant’s removal of the instant disposition and the disposition of the disciplinary surcharge, which was filed by the Gyeonggi-do Appeal Committee.
On January 26, 2016, the Gyeonggi-do Review Committee rendered a judgment that the instant disposition was lawful, and the disposition that imposed three times the surcharge was modified as one of the surcharge for disciplinary action (hereinafter “instant disciplinary action,” and collectively referred to as “each of the instant dispositions”). D.
The plaintiff in the past of the relevant criminal trial is supported by the High Government District Court in relation to the misconduct of this case.