1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. After being appointed as a police officer on November 2, 1987, the Plaintiff served as a district commander within the Gyeongnam Police Agency B police station C District from December 21, 2015 to June 6, 2017. From January 22, 2018, the Plaintiff served as the head of the same police station for the same National Police Agency D police station.

On April 29, 2017, the Plaintiff, who had worked as the C District Ledger, listened to the case of sexual misconduct between employees in the District Register from F, who was the victim, and was in G currency with the Deputy Inspector of B police station at the time, H had already reported to the B police station Auditor on April 28, 2017, the day before the victim, along with the victim.

Since then, in the process of holding interviews with slope I, a person suspected of sexual misconduct, "F was reported to the police station after counseling with the reporter and counseling. It will be expected that the team will be replaced and work for him/her," thereby exposing the identity of the reporter to the perpetrator, and thereafter, he/she neglected his/her duties, such as neglecting his/her duties without taking measures for the recovery of damage.

B. On March 23, 2018, the Defendant took a one-month measure against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff’s act (hereinafter “instant disciplinary measure”) as follows violated Article 56 (Duty of Fidelity) of the State Public Officials Act.

C. On June 22, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an appeal review with the appeals review committee, and the appeals review committee rendered a decision to change the period of the said disciplinary action into one month as a salary reduction of the said disciplinary action.

(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case"). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence 2 through 4 (including numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments.

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. On June 14, 2017, the Defendant violated the res judicata doctrine.