1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff was appointed as a teacher on May 20, 1974 and served as the principal of B elementary school from September 1, 2010 to the principal of B elementary school.

B. On March 2014, the Gyeonggi-do Office of Education was informed of the Plaintiff’s misconduct, etc. regarding the Plaintiff’s selection of school districts and the selection of after-school businesses, and conducted an inspection and investigation of the Plaintiff. As a result, on July 1, 2014, the Defendant disciplinary action and dismissal of the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff violated Articles 56 (Duty of Fidelity), 58 (Duty of Prohibition of Desertion from Office), 61 (Duty of Integrity), and 63 (Duty of Integrity) of the State Public Officials Act on the grounds that the Plaintiff violated Articles 56 (Duty of Integrity), 61 (Duty of Integrity) and 63 (Duty of Integrity)

(hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”). [The grounds for the instant disciplinary action (hereinafter referred to as “instant disciplinary action”) are “paragraphs 1 through 7 of the instant disciplinary action”

[Attachment]

1. On March 14, 2014, the Plaintiff violated his duty to maintain dignity, along with the head of the research department C, went away from the above C and the business trip site before the end of the meeting, and went into the restaurant, taking the surrounding areas of the restaurant while taking the hand and having the hand back after eating, and going into the C’s house.

From March 18, 2014 to December 28, 2014, the Plaintiff found the house of Category C seven times and stayed for about two hours. On April 16, 2014, the Plaintiff left the workplace without permission and stayed in C’s house.

In the Plaintiff’s office computer, 90 photographs related to C have been discovered, among them, photographs of panty panty pictures exposed to some parts of his clothes, etc. were found, and two persons are deemed to have been involved in the Kakakao Stockholm.

2. On February 25, 2014, the Plaintiff in violation of the Service Regulations went away from work place 12:00 without permission and did not return to school 16:30. On February 26, 2014, the Plaintiff violated the Service Regulations, such as leaving from work place without permission or absence from work without permission, etc. five times in total.

3. On March 14, 2014, the Plaintiff received entertainment amounting to KRW 23,00 from a working company D.