Disciplinary sanction against judge for deceit in fiduciary guaranteesSanción disciplinaria a juez por engaño en garantías fiduciarias

VOTO N° 2962-2020 TRIBUNAL DE LA INSPECCIÓN JUDICIAL. San José, at ten fifty-seven in the morning on the sixteenth of September of two thousand twenty.- Disciplinary proceeding processed under case number 19-003305-0031-IJ. Proceeding against [Nombre 001], of legal age, identity card number [Valor 001], at the time of the events, in his capacity as Judge 4 of the Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda of the Second Judicial Circuit, disciplinary summary proceeding initiated at the request of Mrs. [Nombre 007], of legal age, identity card number [Valor 005]. Attorney Villarreal Álvarez participates in this procedure in his capacity as Investigating Judicial Inspector.

RESULTANDO

I.- By resolution issued at ten fifty-nine in the morning on the twenty-sixth of September of the year two thousand nineteen, the accused [Nombre 001], Judge 4 of the Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda of the Second Judicial Circuit, was granted a hearing to respond to the following charges: "1. That you, [Nombre 001], hold a permanent appointment to the position of Judge of the Republic, and therefore you must observe the duties of decorum, dignity, honesty, and honor, both in the performance of your duties and in your private life, as provided in Article 49, subsection 3 of the Judicial Service Statute, given that said position demands that you conduct yourself as an example to society and your behavior must be in accordance with the legal, moral, and social norms that impose correct and transparent conduct. 2. That allegedly you, [Nombre 001], failed in your duty to observe the duties indicated in the previous fact in your private life, since, without specifying an exact date, but around the month of August of two thousand twelve, you, [Nombre 001], requested the collaboration of Mrs. [Nombre 007] so that the latter would act as a fiduciary guarantor for a loan in your name at COOPESERVIDORES, for the exact sum of five million colones. 3. That upon formalizing said loan on the thirteenth of August of two thousand twelve, through transaction number 1012-303-183877 and while present at the offices of said cooperative, Mrs. [Nombre 007] realized that you, [Nombre 001], had requested an amount greater than the one indicated, this being for the exact sum of eight million eight hundred fifty thousand colones, and so when Mrs. [Nombre 007] asked you about the difference between the two amounts, you told her that it was indeed higher, but that she should not worry because you would meet the debt. 4. That without specifying an exact date, but in the month of June of two thousand sixteen, you, [Nombre 001], again contacted Mrs. [Nombre 007] to tell her that you were processing a loan with a mortgage guarantee on the real property where your dwelling house is located, with the entity CAPREDE, for the purpose of debt consolidation (refundición de deudas), indicating to her that in said loan transaction you would include the payment of the debt with COOPESERVIDORES, indicated in the previous fact and where Mrs. [Nombre 007] was listed as a surety (fiadora). 5. That without specifying an exact date, but in the month of June of two thousand sixteen, you, [Nombre 001], and in relation to the new loan you were processing with CAPREDE, indicated to Mrs. [Nombre 007] that the documents for the property to be mortgaged were not yet ready for submission, so you asked said lady to act as a surety (fiadora), but only for one or two weeks, while the certification of the property to be mortgaged was submitted to formalize said real guarantee, such that within that period Mrs. [Nombre 007] would be removed both from the surety (fianza) with CAPREDE and with COOPESERVIDORES, and in making this request, you told Mrs. [Nombre 007] of the urgency for CAPREDE to disburse the sum of twenty-three million colones to you, an amount that was disbursed to you on the thirtieth of June of two thousand sixteen, while at the same time you promised Mrs. [Nombre 007] that once the mortgage guarantee was formalized, said lady's surety (fianza) would be excluded from the loan transaction. 6. That once the two-week period you, [Nombre 001], had promised Mrs. [Nombre 007] had elapsed, when the latter asked you about the substitution of the surety (fianza) for the mortgage, you replied that everything would be resolved and it was a matter of giving it time. 7. That because you, [Nombre 001], did not fulfill what you promised regarding the substitution of Mrs. [Nombre 007]'s surety (fianza) for the mortgage, without specifying an exact date but during the month of July of two thousand sixteen, Mrs. [Nombre 007] appeared before CAPREDE and realized through the file for loan number [Valor 006], which matures on the thirtieth of July of two thousand nineteen, that she had been deceived by you, [Nombre 001],

since the change of guarantee that you had promised her did not exist and had not been considered, and furthermore, at that time Mrs. [Nombre 007] realized that the cancellation of the debt with COOPESERVIDORES, in which Mrs. [Nombre 007] was listed as surety (fiadora), was not part of the debt consolidation plan (plan de refundición de deudas) submitted by you to CAPREDE, and so Mrs. [Nombre 007] contacted you and you admitted that you had deceived her, arguing that you were about to resolve that situation. 8. That you, [Nombre 001], in a presumably unjustified manner, starting in the month of December of the year two thousand seventeen, breached the payments corresponding to the loan transaction with the cooperative COOPESERVIDORES, which caused that starting that month, payroll deductions (collectilla salarial) of Mrs. [Nombre 007] began to reflect bi-weekly deductions (rebajos salariales) for the sum of seventy-one thousand three hundred fifty colones, a situation that continued until the month of September of two thousand nineteen. 9. That as a result of the foregoing, Mrs. [Nombre 007] asked you, [Nombre 001], in a cordial manner, to process through the Poder Judicial the bi-weekly deduction of the loan and the refund of the money that had been deducted from said lady, and you proceeded to pay directly to COOPESERVIDORES only the months of October, November, and December of two thousand eighteen. 10. That as of the month of January of two thousand nineteen, you, [Nombre 001], in a presumably unjustified manner again breached your loan obligation, which caused the entity COOPERSERVIDORES to reactivate the activation of suretyships (fianzas), the bi-weekly deductions from Mrs. [Nombre 007]'s salary, up to the month of August of two thousand nineteen, for a total of two million twenty-four thousand three hundred sixty-three colones and twenty-eight céntimos, of which you only recognized in favor of Mrs. [Nombre 007] the sum of seven hundred seventy-six thousand eighty-two colones, with you owing a remaining balance of one million two hundred fifty-eight thousand two hundred eighty-one colones and twenty-eight céntimos. 11. That without specifying an exact date, but from the month of January of the year two thousand nineteen to August of that same year, and in the face of repeated telephone calls and text messages from Mrs. [Nombre 007] asking you to resolve the conflict, you, [Nombre 001], stated that it was not viable to resolve the situation of non-payment, since you had no liquidity and, in addition, you assured her that you were about to receive an inheritance and payment for the concept of provisional executor (albacea provisional), with which you would proceed to resolve your financial situation. 12. That without specifying an exact date, but from the month of January of the year two thousand nineteen to August of that same year, when Mrs. [Nombre 007] expressed her intention to appeal to the Inspección Judicial due to the previously indicated facts, you, [Nombre 001], answered her in a threatening manner, indicating that she did not know who you were or who she was dealing with, [Nombre 007], which generated fear in the latter due to the fact that you might cause her or her family some direct harm." (Sic)

II.- The defendant [Nombre 001] was duly notified of the opening order on the first of October of the year two thousand nineteen (notification record at image 41 incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/10/2019), and he responded in the terms of his brief at images 42-50, document incorporated into the virtual case file on 09/10/2019).

III.- This resolution is issued within the legal deadlines, with no defects or omissions capable of causing nullity or defenselessness being noted.

Drafted by the Inspectora General Judicial, Orellana Guevara; and.

CONSIDERANDO

I.- PROCEDURAL ASPECTS: Material Error: In the oral and private evidentiary hearing, the investigating body requested that the date indicated in fact two of the opening order be considered a material error and henceforth read "August of the year two thousand twelve." It is resolved: Material error is defined as that mistake made by the legal operator; however, from a comprehensive reading, it is apparent that it is an obvious error, as it does not substantially modify what was resolved. In the case at hand, from a combined reading of fact two and fact three of the initial order, an obvious error in the indicated year is apparent. Observe in this regard, fact 2 indicates: "but around the month of August of two thousand nineteen, you, [Nombre 001], requested the collaboration of Mrs. [Nombre 007] so that the latter would act as a fiduciary guarantor for a loan in your name at COOPESERVIDORES". Fact 3 states: "upon formalizing said loan on the thirteenth of August of the year two thousand twelve, through transaction number 1012-303-183877 and while present at the offices of said cooperative". From a correct reading, it is evident that it is a simple material error in the year entered, and in that regard, the error highlighted by the investigating body is corrected, the correct date being "August of the year two thousand twelve". Regarding evidence to better resolve (prueba para mejor resolver): Pursuant to section 204 of the Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, the collection of evidence to better resolve (prueba para mejor resolver) may be proposed in the brief of conclusive arguments. Article 41.3 of the Código Procesal Civil regulates the subject of complementary evidence, alluding to a discretionary power that the jurisdictional authority - in this case, administrative - may employ when there is a point submitted to litigation that requires further information or clarification. As a particular condition, it is necessary to point out that this type of offer cannot be used by the parties to rectify omissions incurred in relation to the evidentiary elements, which could well have been offered at the appropriate procedural moment. In view of this, the decision-making body is empowered to deny the submitted request without the need for any express resolution indicating so. In this regard, the subject has been repeatedly addressed by the Sala Primera de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, which, in a similar case, stated: "… it must be remembered that evidence to better resolve (prueba para mejor resolver), by its nature, is a power of the judge, who decides on its suitability and necessity and, for that reason, is not obliged to admit that offered by the parties. It is a power that allows them to annex, in the concluding phase, demonstrative elements relevant to the correct decision of the conflict. From this standpoint, while it is lawful to incorporate - to better resolve - completely new evidence, as well as that which was declared unenforceable, null, rejected as untimely or inadmissible, or related to facts that were taken as true due to the defendant's default - cardinal rules 331 and 575 of the Código Procesal Civil -, certainly, the decision to collect it corresponds to a discretionary assessment of the judge, who may dispense with it without the need for an express resolution." (Res. N° 408-A- S1-2012 at 14 hours 30 minutes of April 3, 2013). In the present proceeding, the introduction of the testimony of Mr. [Nombre 010] is sought, in the nature of evidence to better resolve (prueba para mejor resolver). Regarding this formulation, it should be noted that during the evidentiary hearing, the accused stated that it was not possible for him to contact the deponent; thus, the unjustified absence of the deponent can in no way be rectified through evidence to better resolve (prueba para mejor proveer) at this procedural stage. The same reasoning applies to the documentary evidence submitted along with the conclusive arguments brief. As a consequence of the foregoing, the testimony offered in the nature of evidence to better resolve (mejor resolver) is rejected, since its nature is to rectify the unjustified absence of the witness from the convened hearing. Likewise, the documentary evidence provided along with the conclusive arguments brief is rejected, as it is documentary evidence that could well have been provided during the investigation process, and given such neglect, it cannot be rectified by means of evidence to better resolve (prueba para mejor proveer).

II.- PROVEN FACTS: Of importance for the decision in this matter, the following facts are deemed proven: a) The investigated party, [Nombre 001], holds the position of Judge 4 of the Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda of the Second Judicial Circuit. His disciplinary record registers twenty-nine annual service reports (anuales), and as of the report date, he has the following disciplinary sanctions: Written Reprimand (Amonestación Escrita), with an effective date of November eighth and ninth of the year two thousand nineteen (Annual Service Report, at image 93, incorporated into the virtual case file on 11/10/2019, and Report of Disciplinary Sanctions and Corrections per Employee at image 167, incorporated into the virtual case file on 03/09/2020); b) The accused [Nombre 001], in the month of August of the year two thousand twelve, requested that Mrs. [Nombre 007] act as a fiduciary guarantor before the financial entity COOPERSERVIDORES, for the exact sum of five million colones. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the formalization of the loan was carried out on the thirteenth of August of the year two thousand twelve, for an amount of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones, through transaction number 1012-303-183877 (See Consolidated Account Statement from COOPERSERVIDORES, at image 8, incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/09/2020, and statement of deponent [Nombre 011]); c) The accused [Nombre 001], in the month of June of the year two thousand sixteen, again contacted Mrs. [Nombre 007] to request that she act as a fiduciary guarantor for just two weeks before the financial entity CAPREDE, a period during which the mortgage guarantee would be processed to formalize a loan for the sum of twenty-three million colones, for debt consolidation (refundición de deudas), under the promise that the loan with the financial entity COOPESERVIDORES, in which she was listed as fiduciary guarantor, would be included within the loan being processed for debt consolidation. Likewise, once the mortgage guarantee was formalized, she would be removed as a fiduciary guarantor before the financial entity CAPREDE (See statement of [Nombre 011]); d) The loan formalization file number [Valor 006], processed by the financial entity CAPREDE, does not contemplate, as part of the formalization, a change from a fiduciary guarantee to a mortgage guarantee. Nor was the loan acquired with the entity COOPESERVIDORES, in which Mrs. [Nombre 007] is listed as fiduciary guarantor, included within the debt consolidation plan (See statement of [Nombre 011] and CAPREDE Client Account Statement, at image 12, incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/09/2020); e) The accused [Nombre 001] has failed in his obligation to honor the payments corresponding to the loan transaction with the entity COOPESERVIDORES. The default (mora) incurred by the investigated party caused that, starting in the month of December of the year two thousand seventeen, the creditor Cooperative proceeded to make payroll deductions (rebajos salariales) for the sum of seventy-one thousand three hundred fifty colones, during the period from December of the year two thousand seventeen to September of the year two thousand nineteen (See certification issued by COOPERSERVIDORES, at image 7, incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/09/2020); f) During the period from January to August of the year two thousand nineteen, he again defaulted on the loan obligation acquired with the entity COOPESERVIDORES, reactivating the fiduciary guarantee and making bi-weekly deductions to the salary of Mrs. [Nombre 007], for an amount during the mentioned period of two million twenty-four thousand three hundred sixty-three colones and twenty-eight céntimos (See salary certification of Mrs. [Nombre 007] at images 9-11, incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/09/2020); g) Without specifying an exact date, but during the period between January and August of the year two thousand nineteen, upon learning that he was going to be reported to this disciplinary body, the defendant [Nombre 001] told Mrs. [Nombre 007], "As that says. If they sue me, they garnish you. We both sink" (...) "Caprede will come after you. It's not a threat. It's just logic. This week I'll bring Coopeservidores up to date." (See messaging via the WhatsApp platform, at image 166, incorporated into the virtual case file on 15/06/2020).

III.- UNPROVEN FACTS. No probative material was brought to the record to demonstrate a) That the financial entity CAPREDE did not authorize the accused to include the COOPESERVIDORES loan, in which Mrs. [Nombre 007] is listed as a fiduciary guarantor, within the debt consolidation plan (No useful probative material was submitted); b) That Mrs. [Nombre 007] refused to be substituted as the fiduciary guarantor for the loan transaction acquired with the entity CAPREDE (No useful probative material was submitted); c) That the accused incurred expenses for private medical care and domestic service (No useful probative material was submitted); d) That the defendant is processing a loan based on the pension fund through ANEJUD (No useful probative material was submitted); e) That the investigated party is carrying out property sale transactions (No useful probative material was submitted).

IV- ON THE MERITS OF THE MATTER: This summary proceeding was initiated based on the complaint filed on the twenty-third of September of the year two thousand nineteen by Mrs. [Nombre 007], who made known to this disciplinary body that she had acted as fiduciary guarantor for the loan transactions entered into by the investigated party [Nombre 001] with the entities COOPESERVIDORES and CAPREDE, based on the information supplied to her by the defendant, which later proved not to be true. Once said communication was analyzed, the assigned investigating body, by resolution at ten fifty-nine in the morning on the twenty-sixth of September of the year two thousand nineteen, opened this disciplinary proceeding. Once the initial order was communicated to the accused, he proceeded to respond to the formulated requirement, arguing the health breakdown of his wife, a situation that at the time affected the household's economic situation. He also stated that the sales executive of the financial entity, Mr. [Nombre 010], did not allow him, nor did he consider it appropriate, to incorporate the loan acquired with COOPESERVIDORES into the debt consolidation loan, because the priority was to cancel obligations with other companies with higher interest, which would allow him greater liquidity. A situation which, he assures, was known to Mrs. [Nombre 007], whom he informed transparently and without deception that said loan could not be cancelled. Regarding the request by Mrs. [Nombre 007] for the substitution of the fiduciary guarantee, he asserts that when he managed to contact the appropriate person to get in touch and reach an arrangement, Mrs. [Nombre 007] refused to communicate with said person, a situation that generated a negative result; furthermore, he proceeded to explain to the complaining lady that he would cancel said obligations with the sale of some properties he received from an inheritance. Finally, he argues that he is currently processing a loan with ANEJUD for debt consolidation, with which he intends to resolve the payment of said obligations. In accordance with section 174 of the Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, the disciplinary regime aims to ensure the efficiency, correctness, and decorum of the functions entrusted to the Poder Judicial and to guarantee citizens a correct administration of justice. In light of this principle, it is up to the Poder Judicial, as employer, to determine compliance with the duties assigned to judicial officials, under the understanding that if conduct contrary to institutional principles is observed, the application of the disciplinary regime will be necessary. Regarding the duties of the judging person, the Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda, Sección Cuarta, ruling number 33-2013, at fourteen forty-five on the twenty-third of April of the year two thousand thirteen, has stated: "Correlative to the aforementioned rights, the public servant possesses a series of duties of a functional nature, inherent to the public purposes sought by their activity, which must always guide their conduct, so as not to incur a personal fault generating disciplinary responsibility. Without intending to be exhaustive, some of the duties typical of the public employment regime are: a) duty of probity (art. 3 Ley contra la Corrupción y el Enriquecimiento Ilícito en la Administración Pública), b) duty to comply with the principles of public service - continuity, efficiency, adaptation to changes in the legal regime, and equal treatment - (art. 4 Ley General de la Administración Pública), c) duty to ensure an adequate internal control environment (art. 39 of the Ley General de Control Interno) d) duty to protect the best interests of children (arts. 4 and 5 of the Código de la Niñez y la Adolescencia) e) duty to comply with the legal system (art. 13 and concordant articles of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, art. 39.a of the Estatuto de Servicio Civil), f) duty to provide prompt response and information to the user (arts. 5 and 10 of the Ley de Protección al Ciudadano del Exceso de Requisitos y Trámites Administrativos), g) duty of obedience (art. 108 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública), h) duty to act effectively (art. 5 of the Ley de la Administración Financiera y Presupuestos Públicos) i) duty to maintain decorum and provide due attention to the user (art. 114 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública and art. 39. d) and e) of the Estatuto de Servicio Civil) j) duty to respond in case of having acted with intent (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave) (art. 199 and 211 Ley General de la Administración Pública) k) duty to abide by the Constitución Política (art. 11 of said normative body). Additionally, in a supplementary manner, based on Article 9 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública and Article 51 of the indicated Estatuto, the provisions of the Código de Trabajo and other provisions related to the employment relationship are applicable to said public employment relationship, such as, for example, the Ley de Hostigamiento Sexual en el Empleo y la Docencia, Ley de Regulación del Fumado, Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para Personas con Discapacidad, among others. In this vein, while in matters of public employment we cannot speak of full integration of the legal system and labor law principles, given the existence of a statutory and non-contractual relationship (Article 111 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública), the existence of general guidelines for the relationship that are common cannot be ignored, such as, for example, the application of the principle of good faith between both parties, contemplated in Article 19 of the Código de Trabajo." In order to issue a ruling in accordance with the norms regulating the disciplinary process, the probative means incorporated into this disciplinary summary proceeding are assessed. In addition to what has already been stated, in consideration of the special subjection to the service with this Power of the Republic, the voluntary submission to compliance with the functional duties and ethical values that must distinguish the judicial collective can be concluded. In this line of thought, it derives from the cited reference, duties that should not be exclusive to public service management; some of them are applicable to private life, such as the duties of probity, maintaining decorum, responding in case of having acted with intent (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave), as well as the application of the principle of good faith. For the purpose of examining the appropriateness of the application of disciplinary control, the probative material provided to the record is scrutinized. The fault attributed to the investigated party is of a seriousness that warranted the instruction of this disciplinary summary proceeding by the investigating body, considering that conduct in total disregard of dignity, decorum, honesty, good faith, and rectitude in private life is not expected of judiciary personnel. It is deemed proven, not only because the accused does not refute it, but also because from the abundant documentary evidence it is proven that the accused, in the year two thousand twelve, spoke with Mrs. [Nombre 007] to propose her as a fiduciary guarantee for obtaining a loan from the entity COOPESERVIDORES. Concerning this fact, the complaining lady reports that the request for that fiduciary guarantee was to cover a loan transaction for the sum of five million; however, at the moment she appeared before the Cooperative entity, she learned that the amount of obligation number 1012-3030-183877 was for a higher figure, exactly the amount of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones (image 8). Starting from this factual scenario, it is necessary to examine the supporting elements incorporated into this disciplinary summary proceeding. The defendant, in his reply brief, did not refute this attributed fact; he merely attempted to justify the default (mora) incurred with said financial entity. In addition to what has been said, deponent [Nombre 011] stated that Mrs. [Nombre 007] commented to her that the accused had asked her for a surety (fianza) for the amount of five million, but at the time of signing it was about eight million colones. The declarant affirms that she made this comment in the year two thousand twelve, as part of her experience as a surety (fiadora). Added to what has already been expressed, the arguments presented by the accused lack suitability to disqualify the testimony of Mrs. [Nombre 011], who presented her account spontaneously and also appears credible. Thus, it is deemed proven that the accused, disregarding the duty of honesty and good faith, failed to tell the truth at the initial moment of making known to Mrs. [Nombre 007] the conditions of the total amount of the debt and, through insufficiently transparent information, obtained the fiduciary guarantee with the entity COOPESERVIDORES, in loan transaction number 1012-303-183877, for an amount of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones. This disciplinary authority considers that the defensive argument presented, based on the health reasons of his wife and the impact on the family economy, is not acceptable to justify the fault described in the accusatory document. On this subject, it is worth noting, from a legal perspective, the personal guarantee (garantía personal) consists of a legal transaction in which the payment of a loan obligation contracted by a third party with a financial entity is backed. However, from a general understanding, the fiduciary guarantee is based on the confidence of the guarantor (garante) that the debtor will be responsible for the payment of each installment until the total loan transaction is cancelled. Within this same sphere of trust, the debtor must truthfully and honestly inform the conditions of the loan process, namely, the exact amount, the debt payment period, as well as the amount of each monthly installment. Likewise, in the event of a situation that makes the payment of some of the agreed installments impossible, there must be timely and truthful communication with the loan guarantor (garante), to prevent the guarantor's assets from being unexpectedly affected.

To that effect, in the year two thousand twelve, the accused requested the fiduciary guarantee (garantía fiduciaria) of Mrs. [Name 007] for a credit transaction in the amount of five million colones, with the entity COOPESERVIDORES; however, on August thirteenth of the same year, when appearing at the entity to formalize the proceedings in her capacity as fiduciary guarantor (garante fiduciaria), she learned that the amount to be guaranteed was the sum of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones. This fact has been deemed proven not only by the account of Mrs. [Name 007], who appeared confident and emphatic in her account, but also, her version has been corroborated by the testimony of Mrs. [Name 011], who did not merely content herself with repeating what the complainant stated, but also related the personal impact of the feeling of having been deceived. The fraudulent conduct of the investigated party to the detriment of Mrs. [Name 007] is lamentable; she not only obtained the fiduciary guarantee (garantía fiduciaria) through deception regarding the amount of the credit transaction to be guaranteed, but also, in the year two thousand seventeen, he breached the duty of honesty and responsibility to make the monthly installment payments of seventy-two thousand seven hundred twenty-one colones and fifty-three céntimos. This situation caused the creditor entity to resort to deducting the unpaid monthly installments from Mrs. [Name 007]'s salary. This fact has been acknowledged by the defendant, who argued a health problem affecting his wife during the period from February to August two thousand seventeen, a situation that impacted the family economy, since he incurred expenses for medications, private care, transportation, disability pay reductions, and hiring personnel to assist with domestic chores, in addition to attending to the family mortgage that he must pay from his salary. While it is true that the accused provides his wife's discharge summary (epicrisis), with the purpose of demonstrating the health impairment, it is also true that it was issued by the emergency service of the Hospital México of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (imagen 51-52), documentary evidence that is insufficient to substantiate the defense argument regarding the expenses for private medical care, transportation, disabilities, and hiring personnel to perform domestic chores. This disciplinary authority does not ignore the significant investment generated by private medical and pharmacy expenses; however, notwithstanding the foregoing, the mere demonstration of a health impairment, per se, does not confirm the expenditures for these concepts, much less that they caused the economic detriment invoked by the investigated party. The acquisition of a credit obligation requires sound and responsible planning, so that in the event of having to face a deterioration of assets, the impact on the economy is not invasive, and even less so that it affects credibility and trust before third parties, since as a member of the judicial staff, it is incumbent upon him to undertake the management of personal finances with seriousness. This disciplinary authority has proceeded to examine the merit of the case file, finding it completely devoid of proof regarding the impact on the family economy. Thus, the argument put forth by the accused lacks sufficient evidentiary support to justify the breach of payment of the monthly installments. It bears remembering that the acquisition of a credit obligation stems from a responsible act, as a consequence of conscientious planning, based on an orderly and responsible budget of one's finances.

Now, regarding the installments deducted from the complainant's salary, the accused states that he has proceeded to pay the monthly amounts deducted from the complainant. Far from justifying the reproached conduct, this is suitable for demonstrating careless, irresponsible, and negligent behavior on the part of the accused regarding his duties as principal debtor before COOPESERVIDORES, to the point that it was necessary to resort to the fiduciary guarantee (garantía fiduciaria) to resolve the non-payment of two overdue installments for the months of April, August, and December, all dates of the year two thousand eighteen. The very documentary evidence provided by the accused demonstrates a forced and late fulfillment of the credit debt, without overlooking that the various payment vouchers to various financial entities, provided by the defendant, demonstrate increased indebtedness relative to income sources, and consequently causes an unjustified breach in the payment of the credit transactions of the accused, a situation which, as noted in preceding lines, corroborates an irresponsible administration far removed from a planned and sound budget, thus proving the accusatory hypothesis.

Regarding the credit transaction processed before the entity CAPREDE, the complainant asserts that in June of the year two thousand sixteen, the investigated party contacted her again, arguing that he would process a mortgage loan on his dwelling with the entity CAPREDE, for the purpose of a debt consolidation (refundición de créditos), which would include the credit with COOPESERVIDORES, on which she was a guarantor. He subsequently contacted Mrs. [Name 007] again, claiming that the property documents were not ready for submission and therefore he needed her to act as fiduciary guarantee (garantía fiduciaria) for only one or two weeks, while the appraisal of the property to be mortgaged was presented to formalize said real guarantee (garantía real), and once the mortgage loan for the sum of twenty-three million colones was formalized, she would be excluded from the surety bond (fianza) established for CAPREDE and COOPESERVIDORES. However, after a period of fifteen days, Mrs. [Name 007] asked the accused about the substitution of the mortgage surety bond (fianza hipotecaria), receiving the reply that everything would be arranged and it was a matter of time. However, in July of the year two thousand sixteen, Mrs. [Name 007] decided to appear at CAPREDE, at which time she learned that in case file number [Value 006], there was no change of guarantee (garantía) considered, nor had it been planned, and she also learned that the credit transaction with COOPESERVIDORES had not been included in the debt consolidation (refundición de deudas) plan presented to CAPREDE.

On this matter, the accused affirms that the guarantee (garantía) was requested based on the friendship and trust that had existed for many years with the complainant, without her being deceived or induced into error. He argues that the transaction before CAPREDE for the balance of twenty-one million six hundred seventeen thousand seven hundred fifty-four colones is completely up to date, and furthermore, he acquired said mortgage loan with the intention of canceling the contracted transaction; however, the account executive, Mr. [Name 010], did not consider it appropriate, because the priority was to cancel other obligations acquired with other companies with higher interest, in order to obtain greater liquidity. He maintains that, transparently and without any deception, he told Mrs. [Name 007] that the loan with COOPESERVIDORES could not be canceled.

Having examined the case file, it is appreciated that the certification from the entity CAPREDE is indeed in the record, from which the condition of fiduciary guarantor (garante fiduciaria) of Mrs. [Name 007], for the credit transaction in the amount of twenty-three million thirty-five thousand colones, under the special debt consolidation (refundición de deudas) plan, is inferred (imagen 72). Now, the accused [Note: likely referring to the complainant based on context, 'la señora encausada' appears to be a scrivener's error and should be 'la señora quejosa'] ratified her complaint in the evidentiary hearing, and regarding the conditions of the guarantee (garantía), the deponent [Name 011] stated that the complainant was very happy because the accused told her that he was going to settle the loan with COOPESERVIDORES, but, due to an error in the registry studies, he asked Mrs. [Name 007] and a fellow judge for a temporary surety bond (fianza temporal) while the papers were ready. Afterwards she was very distressed and sad because she realized that she was not a temporary guarantor (fiadora temporal), but for a much longer time. She added that the events occurred around mid-year two thousand sixteen, a date she remembers well, because she was going to transfer to the collections unit and they had to leave the office up to date.

Continuing with the study of the documentary evidence, the certificate issued by CAPREDE corroborates the declarant's account regarding her condition as fiduciary guarantor (garante fiduciaria), as well as that of Mrs. [Name 014], who at that time was part of the judiciary. Likewise, the defendant acknowledges that the credit with COOPESERVIDORES was not part of the debt consolidation (refundición de deudas) plan, due to the advice of the account executive.

In accordance with Article 298 of the General Public Administration Act, which states: “1.- All means of proof permitted by public law may be used as evidence, even if they are not admissible under common law. 2.- Unless otherwise provided, evidence shall be assessed in accordance with the rules of sound criticism (sana crítica).” Sound criticism (sana crítica) has been conceived as the exercise of assessing the results of the evidence, which allow the operator to discern the true from the false, through the application of logic, science, and experience, under the exercise of prudence and objectivity in direct relation to a specific matter. In short, it is the rules of correct human understanding, on an average plane, without the excessive rigor of weighed evidence, nor the uncertainty of free conviction. Under this concept, this authority gives faith to the testimony of Mrs. [Name 011], which is not limited to repeating the narrative of Mrs. [Name 007]; she also expounds on the state of anguish and sadness of the complainant upon learning that it was not a temporary surety bond (fianza temporal) and she also did not understand the credit obligation acquired at COOPESERVIDORES, in which she was a guarantor. In addition to the foregoing, the complainant's consent to guarantee the credit obligation for the amount of twenty-three million is understandable, under the promise of a temporary guarantee (garantía temporal), in addition to the commitment to cancel the credit acquired with COOPESERVIDORES and consequently be released from her condition as guarantor.

In accordance with the facts described in the accusatory document, it is necessary to refer to the provisions of Article 49 subsection c) of the Judicial Service Statute, which provides: "In addition to the specific duties established by the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch, judicial employees shall have the following: c) Observe dignity in the performance of their duties and in their private life." In consideration of the provisions of the aforementioned regulation, judicial personnel must observe honest, responsible, and upright conduct. This authority emphasizes that the defendant has based his defense on the subscription of a new credit based on the pension fund through ANEJUD; however, the case file is devoid of any convincing elements that conclusively corroborate the will to seek a sound and responsible means of releasing the complainant from the fiduciary guarantees (garantías fiduciarias) before the entities COOPESERVIDORES and CAPREDE. The same reasoning applies to the argument regarding the sale of properties to pay said obligations; however, the case file is devoid of demonstrating the procedures for the sale of the real estate, a circumstance that reveals that the defendant indeed distorts the factual events, with the purpose of taking advantage for his own benefit, in total disregard for the economic consequences that could be generated for third parties who at the time provided him support. Thus, a conduct prone to irresponsible and disorderly over-indebtedness is also corroborated, without denoting any intentionality to release the complainant from the condition of guarantor over the contracted obligations.

Another aspect that must be mentioned by this disciplinary body concerns the threatening attitude on the part of the defendant at the moment when the complainant informed him of her decision to file the complaint before the Judicial Inspection. The defendant asserts that he has never uttered any threat to Mrs. [Name 007]; he argues that he has treated her with utmost respect and has always been in contact with her to explain the economic solutions to try to resolve the situation. In order to verify the threatening comments, the complainant provided screen captures of images from the messaging platform WhatsApp, from which comments aimed at intimidating, bullying, or threatening Mrs. [Name 007] can be observed, with the purpose of discouraging her from filing the complaint before this disciplinary instance. In this regard, the following is observed: “Like it says. If they fire me, they garnish you. We both sink” (...) “CAPREDE will come down on you. It's not a threat. It's logic. This week I'm bringing Coopeservidores up to date”. First of all, it must be noted that the defendant has not objected to the legitimacy of the messaging or the authorship of the content; by reason of the foregoing, this authority finds no reason to disqualify the evidentiary material provided. Having stated the above, it is clear to this disciplinary authority the intentionality of the accused to once again distort the factual framework of the situation affecting the accused [Note: likely referring to the complainant based on context], in an attempt to free himself from his disciplinary responsibility, under the premise that in the event of a revocation of appointment, she would have to assume the amount of the credit, and thus they would both sink. The attitude assumed by the defendant concerning intimidating the complainant with the non-payment of credit obligations, with the petty interest of evading his disciplinary responsibility, is extremely reprehensible.

In this sense, it must be considered that judicial personnel must adjust their conduct in accordance with Institutional values and the legal system in order not to compromise the credibility of judicial staff. Given the voluntary subjection to the service of the judiciary, conduct contrary to the principles of honesty, responsibility, loyalty, honorability, and transparency is not expected. The Administration, in its capacity as employer, must ensure the correct performance of the judicial body, especially when it concerns judiciary personnel from whom the citizenry expects upright and impeccable behavior in strict adherence to the ethical principles of trust, good faith, and responsibility that should distinguish those who represent the judiciary. In accordance with the foregoing, this disciplinary authority considers that the conduct described in the accusatory document has been fully proven, and consequently, the accused is deserving of the application of the disciplinary regime.

As a corollary of the foregoing, the argument presented by the accused does not exclude him from the disciplinary regime; as noted in previous lines, the defendant was aware of the deterioration of his economy and still opted for irresponsible and excessive indebtedness. Finally, regarding the absence of willful intent (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave), our administrative liability regime distinguishes administrative liability, whose criterion of imputation is objective, from the liability of the official or employee, which is subjective in nature, concerning the willful intent (dolo) and gross negligence (culpa grave) in the official's conduct; it is regulated in Article 199.1 of the General Public Administration Act: “The public servant who has acted with willful intent (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave) in the performance of their duties or on the occasion thereof, even if they have only used the means and opportunities afforded by the office, shall be personally liable to third parties”. Consequently, in light of the administrative legal system, what is relevant is to determine the concepts of “willful intent (dolo)” and “gross negligence (culpa grave)”. The Administrative Litigation Court, Section V, in Resolution No. 00006 - 2012 of February 1, 2012, has referred to the subject as follows: "the first concept refers to the will and intentionality in the harmful act, while the second, although it does not allude to a lack of foresight, intention, and will in causing the damage, the damage occurs, but due to negligence, recklessness, and lack of skill. That is, the official could have foreseen or avoided the damage and did not do so." In other words, in the case of faults attributed to an official, the seriousness thereof is a relevant aspect for the purpose of imputing liability to the servant. An interpretation to the contrary would mean that the servant would not be personally liable, for the conduct must be willful or negligent. The same norm in its subsections 2, 3, and 4, clarifies the situations in which those cases would apply; thus, it indicates that an official acts with gross negligence (culpa grave) both if they issue acts that are manifestly illegal, and if they obey them. "For the existence of subjective liability, the concurrence of damage, willful intent (dolo) or negligence (culpa) on the part of the author of the harmful act, and the causal relationship between the conduct that produces it and the damage is required; taking into account that the latter must be demonstrated and that the negligence (culpa) that will serve as the criterion of imputation must be serious. By reason of the above, the determination of willful intent (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave) of the servant(s) is fundamental for the attribution of subjective liability." (Administrative Litigation Court, Section V, Ibid.).

In the present case, in accordance with what was declared by the complainant and corroborated by the testimony of Mrs. [Name 011], it is evidenced that the accused has acted with deception and thereby obtained a benefit for himself, defrauding the trust of the complainant. In this sense, the accusatory hypothesis described in the opening ruling concerning improper conduct that contravenes the duties to observe dignity, decorum, honesty, and rectitude in his private life has been proven, and consequently, he is deserving of the application of the disciplinary regime. Regarding the defendant's argument concerning a new vision of the Judicial Branch for the purpose of referring this matter to the Restorative Justice Program, requested in the brief dated September ninth of this year. It is considered appropriate to note, in accordance with the provisions of Article 28 of the Regulations of the Restorative Justice Program, a maximum period of three months in processing is established for the process to be referred to the mentioned program, from the issuance of the Notification of Charges. In the case now at hand, the opening ruling was issued at ten hours and fifty-nine minutes on September twenty-sixth of the year two thousand nineteen; as can be observed, by the date of the formulation by the accused, the process has generously exceeded the period established in the cited Regulations. Consequently, the petition filed by the accused is not admissible.

V.- LEGAL CLASSIFICATION AND SANCTION: THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY AND REASONABLENESS IN THE SANCTION TO BE IMPOSED: In consideration of the principles of proportionality and reasonableness, scholars such as Alfonso Chacón Mata have pointed out regarding proportionality: “… disciplinary administrative law must be nourished by the guarantees inherent to due process, and for this reason, before imposing a sanction, it must pass through the screening of first-order constitutional guarantees that respect the rights to a hearing: information and defense as main axes. The sanctioning nature stems from the need to maintain a fair balance between authority and liberty: pillars of democratic coexistence within a State of Law …” (Revista de Servicio Civil, Dirección General de Servicio Civil. Ministerio de la Presidencia de Costa Rica, No 20-21, July 2007, Naturaleza y Fines del Derecho Disciplinario, Chacón Mata, Alfonso). With respect to reasonableness, Article XXIII of Session 28-09 of the Superior Council of March twenty-fourth, two thousand nine, on the subject indicated: “…However, the principles of proportionality and reasonableness of the sanction must be invoked, for which it is necessary to consider judgment No. 8858-98 of December 15, 1998, of the Constitutional Chamber, which states the following: ‘…An act limiting rights is reasonable when it meets a triple condition: it must be necessary, suitable, and proportional. The necessity of a measure directly refers to the existence of a factual basis that makes it essential to protect some good or set of goods of the community - or of a specific group - through the adoption of a differentiating measure. That is, if said action is not carried out, important public interests will be harmed. If the limitation is not necessary, neither can it be considered reasonable, and therefore constitutionally valid. Suitability, on the other hand, involves a judgment as to whether the type of restriction to be adopted fulfills or not the purpose of satisfying the detected need. The unsuitability of the measure would indicate that other mechanisms may exist that better solve the existing need, some of which may fulfill the proposed purpose without restricting the enjoyment of the right in question. For its part, proportionality refers us to a judgment of necessary comparison between the purpose pursued by the act and the type of restriction that is imposed or intended to be imposed, so that the limitation is not of markedly greater magnitude than the benefit that is intended to be obtained for the benefit of the community. Of the last two elements, it could be said that the first is based on a qualitative judgment, while the second is based on a quantitative comparison of the two objects analyzed...’”.

In consideration of the foregoing, the proven conduct is classified as serious in the terms indicated by Article 192 subsection 9) of the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch. The accused has incurred in conduct far removed from what is expected of judicial staff. Resorting to deception for the purpose of obtaining a fiduciary guarantee (garantía fiduciaria) is highly reprehensible; likewise, the intimidating attitude carried out via messages on the WhatsApp platform against the complainant, with the sole purpose of evading disciplinary responsibility, is censurable. An attitude that weakens the citizenry's credibility in judicial staff, from whom transparent, upright, honest, responsible conduct adherent to the principle of good faith is expected. Irremediably, the seriousness of the proven facts does not merit the application of the least of the sanctions provided for by Article 195 last paragraph. Resorting to deception for the purpose of obtaining a benefit for oneself is extremely reprehensible, conduct that has been observed throughout this process, pretending to be seeking a solution to the situation faced by the complainant, without providing the slightest supporting element, thus defrauding the trust of the complainant. In consideration of the foregoing, [Name 001], at the time of the events, Judge of the Administrative Litigation Court, is imposed the sanction of ONE MONTH OF SUSPENSION FROM DUTY WITHOUT PAY. The motivation for the imposition of this sanction resides in a fraudulent action for the purpose of obtaining a fiduciary guarantee (garantía fiduciaria) by means of deception, on the first occasion in a credit transaction for an amount greater than that reported to Mrs. [Name 007], with the entity COOPESERVIDORES, and on the second occasion before CAPREDE, under the promise of a loan for debt consolidation (refundición de deudas) which would include the transaction contracted with COOPESERVIDORES, in addition to the commitment of a temporary guarantee (garantía temporal), all the foregoing taking advantage of years of close friendship, despite having full knowledge of the weakening of his economic situation and still deciding to contract a new, significant credit obligation, securing the fiduciary guarantee (garantía fiduciaria) under the promise of a temporary guarantee (garantía temporal) in a debt consolidation (refundición de deudas) loan that included the obligation with COOPESERVIDORES. The agreed measure is based on the seriousness of the faults for which the accused was found responsible, weighed against the purposes of the disciplinary process, which seeks to assign sanctions aimed at suppressing conducts such as those noted, so that the sanction now agreed upon becomes the only possible punitive measure to apply, given the particularities set forth throughout this resolution. The sanctioned party is informed that, in accordance with the provisions of articles 66, subsection 5, and 209 ibid, they have the right to appeal this ruling before the Superior Council of the Judicial Branch, within three days. Prior to referral to the Superior Council, the sanctioned party has the right to petition the Labor Relations Commission. The Presidency of the Supreme Court of Justice is requested to inform this Court and the Human Resources Department of the dates on which the administrative act issued herein will be executed, in accordance with the provisions of Article 228 of the General Public Administration Act.

POR TANTO

In accordance with the reasoning set forth, articles 174, 192 subsection 9, 195, 208, and 209 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch, in correlation with Article 49 subsection c) of the Judicial Service Statute. The complaint is declared WITH MERIT, for IMPROPER CONDUCT THAT CONTRAVENES THE DUTIES TO OBSERVE DIGNITY, DECORUM, HONESTY, AND RECTITUDE IN HIS PRIVATE LIFE. The fault is classified as serious, and Mr. [Name 001], in his capacity as Judge 4 of the Administrative Litigation and Civil Treasury Court of the Second Judicial Circuit, is imposed the sanction of ONE MONTH OF SUSPENSION FROM DUTY WITHOUT PAY. The sanctioned party is informed that, in accordance with the provisions of articles 66, subsection 5, and 209 ibid, they have the right to appeal this ruling before the Superior Council of the Judicial Branch, within three days. Prior to referral to the Superior Council, the sanctioned party has the right to petition the Labor Relations Commission. The Presidency of the Supreme Court of Justice is requested to inform this Court and the Human Resources Department of the dates on which the administrative act issued herein will be executed, in accordance with the provisions of Article 228 of the General Public Administration Act. NOTIFY. - Estrellita Orellana Guevara, José Francisco López Chaverri, Hugo Hernández Alfaro. General Inspectors.

*WFOR0JSXZTW61* ESTRELLITA ORELLANA GUEVARA - INVESTIGATING INSPECTOR *90ZCDY2NAVK61* HUGO HERNANDEZ ALFARO - INVESTIGATING INSPECTOR *MSLPLS43PTZK61* JOSE FRANCISCO LÓPEZ CHAVERRI - INVESTIGATING INSPECTOR Edificio O.I.J. Primer Piso Teléfonos: 2295-3729 ó 2295-3730 ó 2295-4338. Fax: 2257-5592.

FILE: 19-003305-0031-DI AGAINST: [Nombre 001] INJURED PARTY: [Nombre 007] VOTO N° 2962-2020 TRIBUNAL DE LA INSPECCIÓN JUDICIAL. San José, at ten hours fifty-seven minutes on the sixteenth of September, two thousand twenty.- Disciplinary proceeding processed under file number 19-003305-0031-IJ Process followed against [Nombre 001], of legal age, identity card number [Valor 001], at the time of the facts, in his capacity as Judge 4 of the Administrative and Civil Treasury Appeals Court of the Second Judicial Circuit, a disciplinary summary proceeding initiated at the request of Ms. [Nombre 007], of legal age, ID number [Valor 005]. The attorney Villarreal Álvarez participates in this proceeding in his capacity as Investigating Judicial Inspector.

RESULTANDO

I.- By resolution at ten hours and fifty-nine minutes on the twenty-sixth of September of the year two thousand nineteen, the accused [Nombre 001], Judge 4 of the Administrative and Civil Treasury Appeals Court of the Second Judicial Circuit, was granted a hearing to respond to the following charges: “1. That you, [Nombre 001], are appointed as a tenured Judge of the Republic, for which reason you must observe the duties of decorum, dignity, honesty, and honor, both in the performance of your duties and in your private life, as provided in articles 49, subsection 3 of the Judicial Service Statute, given that said position demands that you constitute an example for society and your behavior must be in accordance with the legal, moral, and social norms that impose correct and transparent conduct. 2. That you, [Nombre 001], presumably failed in your duty to observe, in your private life, the duties indicated in the previous fact, since, without specifying the exact date, but around the month of August of two thousand nineteen, you, [Nombre 001], requested the collaboration of Ms. [Nombre 007] so that she would act as fiduciary guarantor of a credit in your name at COOPESERVIDORES, for the exact sum of five million colones. 3. That at the moment of formalizing said credit on the thirteenth of August of two thousand twelve, through operation number 1012-303-183877 and being at the offices of said cooperative, Ms. [Nombre 007] realized that you, [Nombre 001], had requested an amount greater than the one indicated, this being the exact sum of eight million eight hundred fifty thousand colones, and when Ms. [Nombre 007] asked you about the difference between the two amounts, you told her that it was indeed greater, but not to worry because you would handle the debt. 4. That without specifying an exact date, but in the month of June of two thousand sixteen, you, [Nombre 001], again contacted Ms. [Nombre 007] to tell her that you were processing a credit with a mortgage guarantee on the real property on which your home is located, with the entity CAPREDE and with the purpose of consolidating debts, indicating to her that in said credit operation you would include the payment of the debt with COOPESERVIDORES, indicated in the previous fact and where Ms. [Nombre 007] appeared as a guarantor. 5. That without specifying an exact date, but in the month of June of two thousand sixteen, you, [Nombre 001], and in relation to the new credit you were managing before CAPREDE, told Ms. [Nombre 007] that the documents for the property to be mortgaged were not yet ready for submission, so you requested that she act as a guarantor, but only for one or two weeks, while the certification of the property to be mortgaged was submitted to formalize said in rem guarantee, so that within said period Ms. [Nombre 007] would be excluded from both the guarantee before CAPREDE and at COOPESERVIDORES, and to formulate said request, you stated to Ms. [Nombre 007] the urgency because CAPREDE would transfer to you the sum of twenty-three million colones, an amount that was transferred to you on the thirtieth of June of two thousand sixteen, at the same time that you promised Ms. [Nombre 007] that once the mortgage guarantee was formalized, said lady's guarantee would be excluded from the credit operation. 6. That once the period of fifteen days that you, [Nombre 001], promised Ms. [Nombre 007] had elapsed, when the latter asked you about the substitution of the guarantee for the mortgage, you replied that everything was going to be settled and that it was a matter of giving it time. 7. That because you, [Nombre 001], did not fulfill what was promised, regarding the substitution of Ms. [Nombre 007]'s guarantee for the mortgage, without specifying an exact date but during the month of July of two thousand sixteen, Ms. [Nombre 007] appeared before CAPREDE and realized through the file of credit number [Valor 006], which matures on the thirtieth of July of two thousand nineteen, that she was deceived by you, [Nombre 001], since the change of guarantee that you had promised her did not exist nor had it been considered and, furthermore, at that moment Ms. [Nombre 007] realized that the cancellation of the debt with COOPESERVIDORES, in which Ms. [Nombre 007] appeared as a guarantor, was not recorded in the debt consolidation plan submitted by you before CAPREDE, so Ms. [Nombre 007] contacted you and you admitted that you had deceived her, arguing that you were about to resolve said situation. 8. That you, [Nombre 001], in a presumably unjustified manner, starting in the month of December of the year two thousand seventeen, failed to make the payments corresponding to the credit operation with the cooperative COOPESERVIDORES, which caused, starting from that month, salary deductions for the sum of seventy-one thousand three hundred fifty colones every two weeks to begin to be reflected in the salary stub of Ms. [Nombre 007], a situation that continued until the month of September of two thousand nineteen. 9. That as a result of the above, Ms. [Nombre 007] asked you, [Nombre 001], in good faith, to process through the Judicial Branch the biweekly deduction of the credit and the return of the money that was deducted from said lady, you proceeded to pay directly before COOPESERVIDORES, only the months of October, November, and December of two thousand eighteen. 10. That by the month of January of two thousand nineteen, you, [Nombre 001], in a presumably unjustified manner, again failed to fulfill your credit obligation, which caused the entity COOPESERVIDORES to resume the activation of guarantees, the biweekly deductions from the salary of Ms. [Nombre 007], until the month of August of two thousand nineteen, for a total of two million twenty-four thousand three hundred sixty-three colones and twenty-eight centimos, of which you only acknowledged in favor of Ms. [Nombre 007] the sum of seven hundred seventy-six thousand eighty-two colones, with you owing a balance equivalent to the sum of one million two hundred fifty-eight thousand two hundred eighty-one colones and twenty-eight centimos. 11. That without specifying an exact date, but from the month of January of the year two thousand nineteen until August of that same year, and in the face of repeated telephone calls and text messages from Ms. [Nombre 007], requesting that you resolve the conflict, you, [Nombre 001], stated it was not viable to resolve the situation of payment defaults because you did not have liquidity and, furthermore, you assured her that you were about to receive an inheritance and payment as a provisional executor, with which you would proceed to regularize your financial situation. 12. That without specifying an exact date, but from the month of January of the year two thousand nineteen until August of that same year, when Ms. [Nombre 007] expressed to you her intention to resort to the Inspección Judicial due to the facts previously indicated, you, [Nombre 001], answered her in a threatening manner, indicating to her that she did not know who you were nor who Ms. [Nombre 007] was messing with, which generated fear in the latter due to the fact that you could cause her some grievance to the direct detriment of her or her family.” (Sic)

II.- The defendant [Nombre 001] was duly notified of the opening order on the first day of October of the year two thousand nineteen (notification record at image 41 incorporated into the virtual file on 02/10/2019), he responded in the terms of his brief at images 42-50, a document incorporated into the virtual file on 09/10/2019).

III.- This resolution is issued within the legal time limits, without noticing defects or omissions capable of causing nullity or defenselessness.

Drafted by the Judicial Inspector General, Orellana Guevara; and.

CONSIDERANDO

I.- PROCEDURAL ASPECTS: Material Error: In the oral and private evidentiary hearing, the investigating body requested that the date indicated in the second fact of the opening act be considered a material error and from now on be read as "August of the year two thousand twelve". It is resolved: A material error is defined as that mistake made by the legal operator, however, from a comprehensive reading, it is appreciated that it is an evident error, since it does not modify in substance what was resolved. In the case at hand, from a concatenated reading of the second and third facts of the initial order, an evident error in the year indicated is appreciated. In this regard, observe, fact 2 states: “but around the month of August of two thousand nineteen, you, [Nombre 001], requested the collaboration of Ms. [Nombre 007] so that she would act as fiduciary guarantor of a credit in your name at COOPESERVIDORES”. Fact 3 reports: “at the moment of formalizing said credit on the thirteenth of August of the year two thousand twelve, through operation number 1012-303-183877 and being at the offices of said cooperative”. From a correct reading, it is evident that it is a simple material error in the year recorded, and in that sense, the error pointed out by the investigating body is corrected, the correct wording being "August of the year two thousand twelve". Regarding evidence for better resolution: Pursuant to the provisions of numeral 204 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch, the collection of evidence for better resolution may be proposed in the conclusive arguments brief. Article 41.3 of the Civil Procedure Code regulates the issue of complementary evidence, alluding to a discretionary power that the jurisdictional authority—in this case, administrative—may resort to when there is some point submitted to the litigation that requires greater information or clarity. As a particular condition, it is necessary to point out that this type of offer cannot be used by the parties to remedy omissions incurred in relation to the evidentiary elements, which could well have been offered at the appropriate procedural moment. In view of this, the decision-making body is empowered to deny the request made without the need for any resolution indicating it. In this regard, the issue has been repeatedly addressed by the First Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, in a similar case, it indicated: “… it must be remembered that evidence for better resolution, by its nature, is a power of the judge, who decides on its convenience and necessity and, for this reason, is not obliged to admit that offered by the parties. It is a faculty that allows adding, in the conclusive phase, demonstrative elements relevant to the correct decision of the conflict. From this plane, although it is lawful to incorporate—for better resolution—entirely new proofs, as well as those that were declared unenforceable, null, rejected as untimely or inadmissible, or related to facts that were taken as true due to the defendant's default—cardinals 331 and 575 of the Civil Procedure Code—certainly, the decision to collect it corresponds to a discretionary assessment of the judge, who may dispense with it without the need for an express resolution.” (Res. No. 408-A- S1-2012 at 14 hours 30 minutes on April 3, 2013). In the present process, the introduction of the testimony of Mr. [Nombre 010], as evidence for better resolution, is sought. In relation to this proposal, it must be noted that during the evidentiary hearing, the accused stated that it was not possible for him to contact the deponent; thus, the unjustified absence of the deponent can in no way be remedied through the evidence for better ruling at this procedural stage. The same reasoning applies to the documentary evidence presented with the conclusive arguments brief. As a consequence of the above, the testimony offered as a better resolution measure is rejected, since its nature is to remedy the unjustified absence of the witness to the convened hearing. Likewise, the documentary evidence provided with the conclusive arguments brief is rejected, as it is documentary evidence that could well have been provided during the investigation process and, given such neglect, cannot be remedied by means of evidence for better ruling.

II.- PROVEN FACTS: The following facts are considered proven and of importance for the decision of this matter: a) The investigated individual [Nombre 001] holds the position of Judge 4 of the Administrative and Civil Treasury Appeals Court of the Second Judicial Circuit.

His service record lists twenty-nine annual leave entries; as of the date of the report, he has the following disciplinary sanctions: Written Reprimand, effective on November eighth and ninth of the year two thousand nineteen (Annual Leave Report, at image 93, incorporated into the virtual case file on 11/10/2019, and Report of Sanctions and Disciplinary Corrections by Employee at image 167, incorporated into the virtual case file on 03/09/2020); b) In the month of August of the year two thousand twelve, the accused [Name 001] asked Mrs. [Name 007] to act as a fiduciary guarantor before the financial institution COOPERSERVIDORES, for the exact sum of five million colones. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the loan was formalized on August thirteenth of the year two thousand twelve, for an amount of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones, through operation number 1012-303-183877. (See Consolidated Statement of Account from COOPERSERVIDORES, at image 8, incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/09/2020, and the statement of deponent [Name 011]); c) In the month of June of the year two thousand sixteen, the accused [Name 001] again contacted Mrs. [Name 007] to ask her to act as a fiduciary guarantor for just two weeks, before the financial institution CAPREDE, a period during which a mortgage guarantee would be processed to formalize a loan for the sum of twenty-three million colones, for debt consolidation, under the promise that the loan before the financial institution COOPESERVIDORES, in which she appeared as a fiduciary guarantor, would be included within the loan being managed for debt consolidation. Likewise, once the mortgage guarantee was formalized, she would be released as a fiduciary guarantor before the financial institution CAPREDE. (See statement of [Name 011]); d) Loan formalization file number [Value 006], handled by the financial institution CAPREDE, does not contemplate, as part of the formalization, a change from a fiduciary guarantee to a mortgage guarantee. Nor was the loan acquired with the entity COOPESERVIDORES, in which Mrs. [Name 007] appears as a fiduciary guarantor, included within the debt consolidation plan. (See statement of [Name 011] and Client Statement of Account from CAPREDE, at image 12, incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/09/2020); e) The accused [Name 001] has breached his obligation to honor the payments corresponding to the loan operation with the entity COOPESERVIDORES. The default incurred by the person under investigation caused the creditor Cooperative, starting in the month of December of the year two thousand seventeen, to proceed with salary deductions in the sum of seventy-one thousand three hundred fifty colones, during the period from the month of December of the year two thousand seventeen to the month of September of the year two thousand nineteen. (See certificate issued by COOPESERVIDORES, at image 7, incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/09/2020); f) During the period from January to August of the year two thousand nineteen, he again incurred default on the loan obligation acquired with the entity COOPESERVIDORES, which reactivated the fiduciary guarantee, resulting in biweekly deductions from the salary of Mrs. [Name 007], for an amount during the aforementioned period of two million twenty-four thousand three hundred sixty-three colones and twenty-eight céntimos. (See salary certificate for Mrs. [Name 007] at images 9-11, incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/09/2020); g) Without specifying an exact date, but during the period between January and August of the year two thousand nineteen, upon learning that he was going to be reported to this disciplinary body, the defendant [Name 001] told Mrs. [Name 007], "As the saying goes. If they fire me, they'll garnish you. We both sink" (...) "CAPREDE will come after you. It's not a threat. It's logic. This week I'll get up to date with Coopeservidores." (See messaging via the WhatsApp platform, at image 166, incorporated into the virtual case file on 15/06/2020).

III.- UNPROVEN FACTS. No evidentiary material was submitted to the case file that demonstrates: a) That the financial institution CAPREDE did not authorize the accused to include the COOPESERVIDORES loan, in which Mrs. [Name 007] appears as a fiduciary guarantor, within the debt consolidation plan (No useful evidentiary material was submitted); b) That Mrs. [Name 007] refused to be substituted as a fiduciary guarantor for the credit operation acquired with the entity CAPREDE (No useful evidentiary material was submitted); c) That the accused incurred expenses for private medical care and domestic service (No useful evidentiary material was submitted); d) That the defendant is managing a loan based on his pension fund through ANEJUD (No useful evidentiary material was submitted); e) That the person under investigation is making arrangements to sell real estate (No useful evidentiary material was submitted).

IV- ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE: This summary proceeding was initiated based on the complaint filed on September twenty-third of the year two thousand nineteen by Mrs. [Name 007], who made known to this disciplinary body that she had acted as a fiduciary guarantor for the loan operations undertaken by the person under investigation, [Name 001], with the entities COOPESERVIDORES and CAPREDE, based on information provided to her by the defendant that later proved to be untrue. Once this communication was analyzed, the appointed investigating body, by resolution at ten fifty-nine hours on September twenty-sixth of the year two thousand nineteen, opened this disciplinary proceeding. Once the initial order was communicated to the accused, he responded to the complaint made, arguing the health breakdown of his wife, a situation that at the time affected the household's economic situation. He also stated that the sales executive of the financial institution, Mr. [Name 010], did not allow him, nor did he consider it appropriate, to incorporate the loan acquired with COOPESERVIDORES into the debt consolidation loan, because the priority was to pay off obligations with other companies with higher interest, which would allow him greater liquidity. A situation that, he assures, was known to Mrs. [Name 007], whom he informed transparently and without deception that said loan could not be paid off. Regarding the request by Mrs. [Name 007] for the substitution of the fiduciary guarantee, he asserts that when he managed to contact the appropriate person for her to contact and reach an arrangement, Mrs. [Name 007] refused to communicate with said person, a situation that generated a negative result; furthermore, he proceeded to explain to the complainant that he would pay off said obligations with the sale of some properties he received from an inheritance. Finally, he argues that he is currently managing a loan for debt consolidation through ANEJUD, with which he intends to resolve the payment of said obligations. In accordance with Article 174 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch, the disciplinary regime aims to ensure the efficiency, correctness, and decorum of the functions entrusted to the Judicial Branch and to guarantee the citizens a correct administration of justice. In consideration of this principle, it is the responsibility of the Judicial Branch, in its capacity as employer, to determine the fulfillment of the management assigned to judicial staff, under the understanding that if conduct contrary to institutional postulates is observed, the application of the disciplinary regime will be necessary. Regarding the duties of the adjudicator, the Administrative and Civil Treasury Tribunal, Section Four, has pronounced, in ruling number 33-2013, at fourteen forty-five hours on April twenty-third of the year two thousand thirteen. "Correlative to the aforementioned rights, the public servant has a series of civil service obligations, inherent to the public purposes sought by their activity, which must always guide their management, in order not to incur a personal fault generating disciplinary liability. Without pretending to be exhaustive, some of the duties characteristic of the public employment regime are: a) duty of probity (Art. 3 of the Law Against Corruption and Illicit Enrichment in Public Administration), b) duty to comply with the principles of public service - continuity, efficiency, adaptation to changes in the legal regime, and equal treatment - (Art. 4 of the General Law of Public Administration), c) duty to safeguard an adequate internal control environment (Art. 39 of the General Law of Internal Control), d) duty to protect the best interests of children (Art. 4 and 5 of the Childhood and Adolescence Code), e) duty to comply with the legal system (Art. 13 and concordant articles of the General Law of Public Administration, Art. 39.a of the Civil Service Statute), f) duty to provide prompt response and information to the user (Art. 5 and 10 of the Law for the Protection of the Citizen from Excess Requirements and Administrative Procedures), g) duty of obedience (Art. 108 of the General Law of Public Administration), h) duty to act effectively (Art. 5 of the Law of Financial Administration and Public Budgets), i) duty to maintain decorum and provide due attention to the user (Art. 114 of the General Law of Public Administration and Art. 39.d) and e) of the Civil Service Statute), j) duty to be liable in case of having acted with fraud (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave) (Art. 199 and 211 of the General Law of Public Administration), k) duty to abide by the Political Constitution (Art. 11 of said normative body). Additionally, in a supplementary manner, based on Article 9 of the General Law of Public Administration and Article 51 of the aforementioned Statute, the provisions of the Labor Code and other provisions related to the employment relationship are applicable to said public employment relationship, such as the Law on Sexual Harassment in Employment and Teaching, the Law Regulating Smoking, the Law on Equal Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities, among others. In this regard, although in matters of public employment we cannot speak of a full integration of the legal system and principles in labor matters given the existence of a statutory and not a contractual relationship (Article 111 of the General Law of Public Administration), the existence of general lines of guidance for the relationship that are common cannot be ignored, such as, for example, the application of the principle of good faith between both parties, contemplated in Article 19 of the Labor Code". With the purpose of issuing a ruling in accordance with the system that regulates the disciplinary process, we proceed to assess the evidentiary means incorporated into this disciplinary summary case file. Coupled with the foregoing, in consideration of the special subjection to the service with this Branch of the Republic, it allows us to conclude the voluntary submission to the fulfillment of the functional duties and the ethical values that must distinguish the judicial collective. Along these lines of thought, deriving from the cited examination, duties that should not be exclusive to public management; some of them apply to private life, as are the duties of probity, guarding decorum, being liable in case of having acted with fraud (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave), as well as the application of the principle of good faith. For the purpose of examining the appropriateness of applying disciplinary control, we proceed to the substantiation of the evidentiary material provided to the case file. The fault attributed to the person under investigation is of such seriousness that it has warranted the instruction of this disciplinary summary proceeding by the investigating body, since conduct in total disregard of dignity, decorum, honesty, good faith, and rectitude in private life is not expected of judicial staff. It is taken as proven not only because the accused does not refute it, but also because from the abundant documentary evidence it is taken as proven that the accused, in the year two thousand twelve, spoke with Mrs. [Name 007] in order to propose her as a fiduciary guarantee for obtaining a loan before the entity COOPESERVIDORES. Regarding this fact, the complainant reports that the request for that fiduciary guarantee was to cover a loan operation for the sum of five million, however, at the moment she appeared before the Cooperative entity, she learned that the amount of obligation number 1012-3030-183877 was for a higher figure, exactly for the amount of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones (image 8). Based on this factual scenario, it is necessary to examine the supporting elements incorporated into this disciplinary summary case file. The defendant, in his response brief, has not refuted this attributed fact; he merely tried to justify the default incurred with said financial institution. In addition to the foregoing, deponent [Name 011] stated that Mrs. [Name 007] told her that the accused had asked her for a surety bond for the amount of five million, but when it came time to sign, it was something like eight million colones. The declarant affirms that she made that comment in the year two thousand twelve, as part of her experience as a surety. Added to what has already been expressed, the arguments presented by the accused lack suitability to disqualify the testimony of Mrs. [Name 011], who gave her account spontaneously and who also appears credible. Thus, it is taken as proven that the accused, disregarding the duty of honesty and good faith, misrepresented the truth at the initial moment of informing Mrs. [Name 007] of the conditions of the total debt amount and, through less-than-transparent information, obtained the fiduciary guarantee with the entity COOPESERVIDORES, in loan operation number 1012-303-183877, for an amount of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones. This disciplinary authority considers that the defensive argument based on his wife's health reasons, as well as the impact on the family economy, are not acceptable to justify the fault described in the accusatory document. On this subject, it is worth noting, from a legal perspective, that a personal guarantee consists of a legal transaction in which the payment of a loan obligation contracted by a third party with a financial institution is backed. However, from a general understanding, a fiduciary guarantee is based on the guarantor's trust that the debtor will be responsible for the payment of each installment until the entire loan operation is paid off. Within this same sphere of trust, the debtor must inform transparently and honestly the conditions of the loan management, namely, the exact amount, the term of the debt payment, as well as the amount of each monthly installment. Likewise, in the event of a situation that makes the payment of any of the agreed installments impossible, there must be timely and truthful communication with the loan guarantor, in order to prevent the guarantor's assets from being unexpectedly affected. To this effect, in the year two thousand twelve, the accused requested the fiduciary guarantee of Mrs. [Name 007] for a loan operation in the amount of five million colones, with the entity COOPESERVIDORES; however, on August thirteenth of the same year, when she appeared at the entity to formalize the proceedings in her capacity as a fiduciary guarantor, she learned that the amount to be guaranteed was the sum of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones. This fact has been taken as proven not only by the account of Mrs. [Name 007], who appeared confident and emphatic in her account; furthermore, her version has been corroborated with the testimony of Mrs. [Name 011], who not only confirmed what the complainant stated, but also related her own feeling of having been deceived. The fraudulent conduct of the person under investigation to the detriment of Mrs. [Name 007] is regrettable, as he not only obtained the fiduciary guarantee through deception regarding the amount of the loan operation to be guaranteed, but also, in the year two thousand seventeen, he failed in his duty of honesty and responsibility to comply with the payment of the monthly installments in the sum of seventy-two thousand seven hundred twenty-one colones and fifty-three céntimos. This situation caused the creditor entity to resort to deducting the unpaid monthly installments from the salary amount of Mrs. [Name 007]. This fact has been acknowledged by the defendant, who argued a health affliction of his wife during the period from February to August of the year two thousand seventeen, a situation that caused an impact on the family economy, since he incurred expenses for medications, private care, transportation, deductions for sick leave, and hiring staff to assist with domestic chores, in addition to handling the family mortgage he must pay from his salary. While it is true that the accused provides his wife's medical discharge summary, with the purpose of demonstrating the health breakdown, it is also true that it was issued by the emergency service of the Hospital México of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (image 51-52), documentation that is insufficient to substantiate the defense argument regarding expenses for private medical care, transportation, sick leaves, and hiring staff to perform domestic chores. This disciplinary authority does not ignore the significant investment generated by private medical and pharmacy expenses; however, notwithstanding the foregoing, the mere demonstration of a health affliction, per se, does not confirm the disbursements for these items, and even less so that they generated the economic detriment invoked by the person under investigation. The acquisition of a loan obligation requires sound and responsible planning, so that in the eventual case of facing a decline in assets, the impact on the economy is not invasive and, even less so, affects credibility and trust before third parties, since as part of the judicial staff, it behooves them to seriously assume the administration of personal finances. This disciplinary authority has proceeded to examine the merits of the case file, finding them completely devoid of demonstration of the impact on the family economy; thus, the argument presented by the accused lacks sufficient evidentiary support to justify the non-payment of the monthly installments. It is worth remembering that the acquisition of a loan obligation stems from a responsible act, as a consequence of conscientious planning, based on an orderly and responsible budget of one's finances. Well, regarding the installments deducted from the complainant's salary, the accused states that he has proceeded to pay the monthly amounts deducted from the complainant. Far from justifying the reproached conduct, it is suitable to demonstrate a careless, irresponsible, and negligent behavior of the accused regarding his duties as the principal debtor before COOPESERVIDORES, to the point that the fiduciary guarantee had to be resorted to in order to resolve the non-payment of two overdue installments for the months of April, August, and December, all dates of the year two thousand eighteen. The very documentation provided by the accused demonstrates a forced and late fulfillment of the loan debt, without neglecting that the various payment receipts to diverse financial institutions, provided by the defendant, demonstrate greater indebtedness relative to income sources, and consequently causes an unjustified non-payment of the accused's loan operations, a situation that, as pointed out in preceding lines, corroborates irresponsible management far from a planned and healthy budget, thus demonstrating the accusatory hypothesis.

Regarding the credit transaction processed with the CAPREDE entity, the complainant asserts that, around June of two thousand sixteen, the investigated party contacted her again, arguing that he would process a mortgage loan on her home with the CAPREDE entity, for the purpose of a debt consolidation (refundición de créditos), in which he would include the loan with the COOPESERVIDORES entity, on which she appeared as a guarantor (fiadora). He subsequently contacted Mrs. </sub></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> _{[Name 007]}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{again, claiming that the property documents were not ready for submission and therefore he needed her to appear as a fiduciary guarantee (garantía fiduciaria) for just one or two weeks, while the property qualification was submitted to formalize said real guarantee (garantía real), and once the mortgage loan for the sum of twenty-three million colones was formalized, she would be released from the surety bond (fianza) constituted with the CAPREDE and COOPESERVIDORES entities. However, after a period of fifteen days, Mrs.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{[Name 007]}</span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{asked the accused about the substitution of the mortgage surety bond, receiving the response that everything would be sorted out and it was just a matter of time. However, around July of two thousand sixteen, Mrs.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{[Name 007]}</span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{decided to appear in person at CAPREDE, at which time she learned that in file number}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{[Value 006]}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{, the change of guarantee did not exist, nor had it been considered, and she also learned that the credit transaction with COOPESERVIDORES had not been included in the debt consolidation plan submitted to CAPREDE. On this matter, the accused affirms that the guarantee was requested based on the friendship and trust that had existed for many years with the complainant, without her being deceived or induced into error. He argues that the transaction with CAPREDE for the balance of twenty-one million six hundred seventeen thousand seven hundred fifty-four colones is completely current and, furthermore, that he acquired said mortgage loan with the intention of canceling the contracted transaction; however, the account executive, Mr.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> _{[Name 010]}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{, did not consider it appropriate, because the priority was to cancel other obligations acquired with other companies with higher interest, in order to obtain greater liquidity. He maintains that, transparently and without any deception, he told Mrs.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> _{[Name 007]}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{that the loan with COOPERSERVIDORES could not be canceled. Examining the case file, it is noted that a certification from the CAPREDE entity is indeed in the file, from which the condition of fiduciary guarantor (garante fiduciaria) of Mrs.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{[Name 007]}</span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{is deduced, for the credit transaction for the amount of twenty-three million thirty-five thousand colones, under the special debt consolidation plan (image 72). Now, the complainant ratified her complaint in the evidentiary hearing and regarding the conditions of the guarantee, the deponent}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{[Name 011]}</span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{stated that the complainant was very happy because the accused told her he would finalize the loan with COOPESERVIDORES, but, due to an error in the registry studies, he asked Mrs.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{[Name 007]}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> _{and a fellow judge for a temporary surety bond (fianza temporal) until the papers came through. Afterwards, she was very distressed and sad because she realized it was not a temporary surety, but for much longer. She adds that the events occurred around mid-two thousand sixteen, a date she remembers well, because she was going to move to the collections unit and they had to leave the office up to date. Continuing with the study of the documentary evidence, the certificate issued by CAPREDE corroborates the declarant's account regarding her condition as fiduciary guarantor as well as that of Mrs.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{[Name 014]}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> _{, who at that time was part of the judiciary. Likewise, the defendant acknowledges that the loan with COOPESERVIDORES was not part of the debt consolidation plan, due to the advice of the account executive. Pursuant to article 298 of the General Law on Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública), it states: “}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> <em>_{1.- The means of proof may be all those permitted by public law, even if they are not admissible under common law. 2.- Unless otherwise provided, the evidence shall be assessed in accordance with the rules of sound criticism (sana crítica)}</em></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{”. Sound criticism has been conceived as the exercise of assessing the results of the evidence, which allows the operator to discern the true from the false, through the application of logic, science, and experience, under the exercise of prudence and objectivity in direct relation to a specific matter. In short, they are the rules of correct human understanding, at an average level, without the excessive rigor of fixed evidence, nor the uncertainty of free conviction. Under this concept, this authority gives faith to the testimony of Mrs.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> _{[Name 011]}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{, which is not limited to replicating the narrative of Mrs.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{[Name 007]}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> _{; it also exposes the state of anguish and sadness of the complainant upon learning that it was not a temporary surety bond and that she also did not understand the credit obligation acquired with COOPESERVIDORES, on which she appeared as guarantor. In addition to the foregoing, the complainant's consent to guarantee the credit obligation for the amount of twenty-three million is understandable, under the promise of a temporary guarantee, in addition to the commitment to cancel the loan acquired with the COOPESERVIDORES entity and consequently be released from her condition as guarantor. In accordance with the facts described in the accusatory document, it is necessary to resort to the provisions of article 49, subsection c) of the Judicial Service Statute (Estatuto de Servicio Judicial), which provides: “}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> <em>_{In addition to the specific duties established by the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch, judicial servants shall have the following}</em></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> _{: c)}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><em>_{Observe dignity in the performance of their duties and in their private life}</em></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{”. In consideration of the provisions of the cited regulation, judicial personnel must observe honest, responsible, and upright conduct. This authority emphasizes that the defendant has based his defense on the signing of a new loan based on the pension fund through ANEJUD; however, the case file is devoid of elements of conviction that conclusively corroborate the will to seek a sound and responsible means of releasing the complainant from the fiduciary guarantees with the COOPESERVIDORES and CAPREDE entities. The same reasoning applies to the argument concerning the sale of properties to make the payment of said obligations; however, the case file is devoid of demonstrating the efforts to sell the properties, a circumstance that reveals that the defendant is effectively distorting the factual events, for the purpose of obtaining an advantage for his own benefit, in total disregard for the economic consequences that could be generated for third parties who, at the time, offered him support. Thus, it is also possible to corroborate a conduct prone to irresponsible and disorderly over-indebtedness, without denoting the intention to release the complainant from the condition of guarantor on the contracted obligations. Another aspect that must be mentioned by this disciplinary body is concerning the threatening attitude of the defendant at the moment the complainant informed him of her decision to file a complaint with the Judicial Inspection (Inspección Judicial). The defendant assures that he has never uttered any threat to Mrs.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{[Name 007]}</span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{, argues that he has treated her with utmost respect and has always been in contact with her to explain economic solutions to try to resolve the situation. In order to verify the threatening comments, the complainant provided screenshot images of messaging via the WhatsApp platform, from which comments oriented to intimidate, frighten, or threaten Mrs.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{[Name 007]}</span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{are observed, with the purpose of dissuading her from filing the complaint before this disciplinary instance. In this regard, the following is observed: “}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><em>_{As the saying goes. If they fire me, they garnish you. We both sink}</em></span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{” (...) “}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><em>_{Caprede falls on you. It's not a threat. It's logic. This week I bring Coopeservidores up to date}</em></span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{”. At the outset, it should be noted that the defendant has not objected to the legitimacy of the messaging or the authorship of the content. Based on the foregoing, this authority finds no reason to disqualify the evidentiary material provided. Having stated the above, it is clear to this disciplinary authority the defendant's intent to once again distort the factual framework of the situation affecting the complainant, in an attempt to free himself from his disciplinary responsibility, under the premise that in the event of revocation of his appointment, he would have to assume the amount of the loan, and in this way, they would both sink. The attitude assumed by the defendant concerning intimidating the complainant, through the non-payment of the credit obligations, with the petty interest of evading his disciplinary responsibility, is highly reprehensible. In this sense, it must be considered that the personnel of the judiciary must adjust their actions in accordance with Institutional values and the legal system in order not to compromise the credibility of the judicial officials. In consideration of the voluntary subjection to the service of the judiciary, a conduct contrary to the principles of honesty, responsibility, loyalty, integrity, and transparency is not expected. The Administration, in its capacity as employer, must ensure the correct performance of the judicial collective, especially when it involves judicial personnel from whom the citizenry expects upright and unimpeachable behavior, in strict subjection to the ethical principles of trust, good faith, and responsibility that must distinguish those who represent the judiciary. In accordance with the foregoing, this disciplinary authority considers that the conduct described in the accusatory document has been fully demonstrated and, consequently, the defendant makes himself deserving of the application of the disciplinary regime. As a corollary of the foregoing, the argument presented by the defendant does not exclude him from the disciplinary regime. As noted in previous lines, the defendant was aware of the deterioration of his finances and still opted for irresponsible and excessive indebtedness. Finally, regarding the absence of fraud (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave), our administrative liability regime distinguishes administrative liability, whose criterion of imputation is objective, and the liability of the official or servant, which is of a subjective nature, the fraud and gross negligence in the action of the official; it is regulated in article 199.1 of the General Law on Public Administration:}</span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><em>_{“The public servant who acted with fraud or gross negligence in the performance of their duties or on occasion thereof shall be personally liable to third parties, even if they only used the means and opportunities offered by the position”}</em></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> _{. Consequently, in light of the administrative legal system, what is relevant is to determine the concepts of “fraud” and “gross negligence”. The Contentious-Administrative Tribunal, Section V, in Resolution No. 00006 - 2012 of February 1, 2012, has addressed the subject in the following manner:}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> <em>_{\"the first concept refers to the will and intent in the harmful act, while the second, although it does not allude to the lack of foresight, intention, and will in causing the damage, it occurs, but due to negligence, imprudence, and lack of skill. That is, the official could have foreseen or avoided the damage and did not do so\".}</em></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{In other words, in the case of faults attributed to an official, the seriousness of the fault is a relevant aspect in order to be able to attribute liability to the servant. A contrary interpretation would lead to the servant not being personally liable, since the conduct must be fraudulent or negligent. The same norm, in its subsections 2, 3, and 4, clarifies the assumptions under which one would be in those cases; thus, it indicates that the official who issued manifestly illegal acts, as well as the one who obeyed them, acts with gross negligence.}</span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><em>_{\"For the existence of subjective liability, the concurrence of a damage, the fraud or negligence on the part of the author of the harmful act, and the causal relationship between the conduct that produces it and the damage, is required; taking into account that the latter must be demonstrated and that the negligence that will serve us as a criterion of imputation must be serious. By reason of the aforementioned, it is fundamental for the attribution of subjective liability, the determination of the fraud or gross negligence of the servant(s)\". (}</em></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> _{Contentious-Administrative Tribunal, Section V, Ibid). In the present case, in accordance with what was declared by the complainant and corroborated with the testimony of Mrs.}</span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{[Name 011]}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{, it is evidenced that the accused acted with deceit and thereby obtained an advantage for his benefit, defrauding the trust of the complainant. In this sense, it has been demonstrated the prosecutorial hypothesis described in the opening order concerning improper conduct that contravenes the duties of observing dignity, decorum, honesty, and rectitude in his private life and, consequently, he makes himself deserving of the application of the disciplinary regime. Regarding the defendant's thesis concerning a new vision of the Judicial Branch for the purpose of referring this matter to the Restorative Justice program, as requested in his brief of September ninth of this year. It is considered pertinent to note, in accordance with the provisions of article 28 of the Regulation of the Restorative Justice Program, a maximum period of three months in process is established for the process to be referred to the mentioned program, from the issuance of the Notification of Charges. In the case now before us, the opening order was issued at ten hours and fifty-nine minutes on September twenty-sixth of the year two thousand nineteen. As can be observed, by the date of the defendant's formulation, the process has generously exceeded the period provided in the cited Regulation. Consequently, the petition raised by the defendant is not admissible.}</span></span></span></div>\n<div style=\"line-height: 150%;\" align=\"justify\"><span class=\"example1 288518\" style=\"color: #010101; font-family: 'TIMES NEW ROMAN';\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"></span></span></div>\n<div style=\"line-height: 150%;\" align=\"justify\"><span class=\"example1 288518\" style=\"color: #010101; font-family: 'TIMES NEW ROMAN';\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong>_{V.- LEGAL CLASSIFICATION AND SANCTION: THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY AND REASONABLENESS IN THE SANCTION TO BE IMPOSED:}</strong></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{In consideration of the principles of proportionality and reasonableness, Doctrinaires such as Alfonso Chacón Mata, have pointed out regarding proportionality: “...}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><em>_{administrative disciplinary law must be nourished by the guarantees inherent to due process and for this reason, before imposing a sanction, it must pass through the screening of constitutional guarantees of first order that respect the rights of hearing: information and defense as main axes. The sanctioning nature comes from the need to maintain a fair balance between authority and liberty: pillars of democratic coexistence within a State of Law}</em></span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{...” (Revista de Servicio Civil, Dirección General de Servicio Civil. Ministerio de la Presidencia de Costa Rica, No 20-21, July 2007, Naturaleza y Fines del Derecho Disciplinario, Chacón Mata, Alfonso). With respect to reasonableness, Article XXIII of the Session of the Superior Council 28-09 of March twenty-fourth, two thousand nine, regarding the topic indicated:}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> <em>_{“...However, the principles of proportionality and reasonableness of the sanction must be brought up, for which it is necessary to consider judgment No. 8858-98 of December 15, 1998, of the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional), where the following is stated: ‘...An act limiting rights is reasonable when it meets a triple condition: it must be necessary, suitable, and proportional. The}</em></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong><em>_necessity</em></strong></span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><em>_{of a measure makes direct reference to the existence of a factual basis that makes it necessary to protect some good or set of goods of the community - or of a specific group - through the adoption of a differentiating measure. That is, if said action is not carried out, important public interests will be harmed. If the limitation is not necessary, it cannot be considered reasonable, and therefore constitutionally valid. The}</em></span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong><em>_suitability</em></strong></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><em>_{, for its part, entails a judgment regarding whether the type of restriction to be adopted fulfills or does not fulfill the purpose of satisfying the detected need. The unsuitability of the measure would indicate that other mechanisms may exist that better solve the existing need, some of which could fulfill the proposed purpose without restricting the enjoyment of the right in question. For its part,}</em></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong><em>_{proportionality}</em></strong></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><em>_{refers us to a judgment of necessary comparison between the purpose pursued by the act and the type of restriction that is imposed or intended to be imposed, so that the limitation is not of a markedly greater entity than the benefit that is intended to be obtained with it for the benefit of the community. Of the last two elements, it could be said that the first is based on a qualitative judgment, while the second starts from a quantitative comparison of the two objects analyzed...’”.}</em></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> _{In consideration of the foregoing, the demonstrated conduct is classified as}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong>_{serious (grave)}</strong></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{in the terms indicated by article 192, subsection 9) of the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch. The defendant has incurred conduct far from what is expected of judicial officials. It is highly reproachable to resort to deceit for the purpose of obtaining a fiduciary guarantee; in the same manner, the intimidating attitude carried out through messaging on the WhatsApp platform against the complainant, with the sole purpose of evading disciplinary responsibility, is reprehensible. An attitude that weakens the citizenry's credibility in judicial officials, from whom transparent, upright, honest, responsible conduct, and conduct adhering to the principle of good faith, is expected. Irremediably, the seriousness of the demonstrated facts does not merit the application of the least of the sanctions provided by article 195, last paragraph. It is extremely reprehensible to resort to deceit for the purpose of obtaining an advantage for one's own benefit, conduct that has been observed throughout this process, pretending that he is dealing with a solution to the situation faced by the complainant, without providing the slightest supporting element, thereby defrauding the trust of the complainant. In consideration of the above,}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{[Name 001]}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{, at the time of the events, Judge of the Contentious-Administrative Tribunal, is imposed the sanction of}</span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong>_{ONE MONTH OF SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE WITHOUT PAY}</strong></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{. The motivation for the imposition of this sanction resides in a fraudulent action for the purpose of obtaining a fiduciary guarantee through deceit, on the first occasion, in a credit transaction for an amount greater than that reported to Mrs.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{[Name 007]}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> _{, with the COOPESERVIDORES entity, and on the second occasion before CAPREDE, under the promise of a loan for debt consolidation in which the contracted transaction with the COOPESERVIDORES entity would be included, in addition to the commitment of a temporary guarantee, all of the foregoing taking advantage of years of close friendship, despite having full knowledge of the weakening of his economic situation and still, decided to contract a new credit obligation for a significant amount, ensuring the fiduciary guarantee under the promise of a temporary guarantee in a loan for debt consolidation that included the obligation with the COOPESERVIDORES entity. The agreed measure is based on the seriousness of the faults for which the defendant was found responsible, weighed against the purposes of the disciplinary process, which aims to assign sanctions tending to suppress conduct as noted, so that the sanction now agreed becomes the only possible sanctioning measure to apply, considering the particularities set forth throughout this resolution. The sanctioned party is hereby informed that, in accordance with the provisions of articles 66, subsection 5, and 209 ibid, he has the right to appeal this ruling before the Superior Council of the Judicial Branch, within three days. Prior to referral to the Superior Council, the sanctioned party has the right to petition before the Labor Relations Commission. The Presidency of the Supreme Court of Justice is requested to inform this Tribunal and the Human Resources Department of the dates on which the administrative act issued herein will be executed, pursuant to the provisions of article}</span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong>₂₂₈</strong></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{of the General Law on Public Administration}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><em>_.</em></span></span></div>\n<div style=\"text-indent: 12mm; line-height: 150%; margin: 0.00mm 0mm 0.00mm 0mm;\" align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #010101; font-family: 'TIMES NEW ROMAN';\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"></span></span></div>\n<div style=\"text-indent: 12mm; line-height: 150%; margin: 0.00mm 0mm 0.00mm 0mm;\" align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #010101; font-family: 'TIMES NEW ROMAN';\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"></span> <span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong><em><u>_{POR TANTO}</u></em></strong></span></span></div>\n<div style=\"text-indent: 12mm; line-height: 150%; margin: 0.00mm 0mm 0.00mm 0mm;\" align=\"justify\"><span style=\"color: #010101; font-family: 'TIMES NEW ROMAN';\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{In accordance with the reasoning set forth, articles 174, 192 subsection 9, 195, 208, and 209 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch, in correlation with article 49, subsection c) of the Judicial Service Statute.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> <em><u>_{The complaint is hereby upheld}</u></em></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{, for}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> <strong>_{IMPROPER CONDUCT THAT CONTRAVENES THE DUTIES OF OBSERVING DIGNITY, DECORUM, HONESTY, AND RECTITUDE IN HIS PRIVATE LIFE.}</strong></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{The fault is classified as}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> <strong><em>_{serious (grave)}</em></strong></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{and the sanction of}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong> _{ONE MONTH OF SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE WITHOUT PAY}</strong></span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{is imposed upon Mr.}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> _{[Name 001]}</span><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">_{, in his capacity as Judge 4 of the Contentious-Administrative and Civil Treasury Tribunal of the Second Judicial Circuit.}</span></span></div> The sanctioned party is informed that, in accordance with the provisions of articles 66 subsection 5 and 209 ibidem, they have the right to appeal this ruling before the Superior Council of the Judiciary, within three days; prior to referral to the Superior Council, the sanctioned party has the right to petition before the Labor Relations Commission. The Presidency of the Supreme Court of Justice is requested to inform this Tribunal and the Human Resources Department of the dates on which the administrative act issued herein will be executed, in compliance with the stipulations of section ₂₂₈ of the General Law of Public Administration. <strong>NOTIFY</strong>.- <em>Estrellita Orellana Guevara, José Francisco López Chaverri, Hugo Hernández Alfaro.</em> General Inspectors</sub></em></strong></span></span><span style="color: #010101; font-family: 'TIMES NEW ROMAN';"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">_.</span></span></div> <table style="border-collapse: collapse; border: none;" width="576" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><colgroup> <col width="218" /> <col width="218" /> <col width="218" /> </colgroup> <tbody> <tr> <td style="border: solid #010101 0px;" align="left" valign="top" width="218"> <div align="justify"><span style="color: #010101; font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"></span></span></div> </td> <td style="border: solid #010101 0px;" align="left" valign="top" width="218"> <div align="justify"><img src="" alt="graphic" width="200" height="65" border="0" /><span style="color: #010101; font-family: 'TIMES NEW ROMAN';"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span></span><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">_{*WFOR0JSXZTW61*}</span></span><span style="color: #010101; font-family: 'TIMES NEW ROMAN';"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span></span><span style="color: #010101; font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-size: 8pt;">_{WFOR0JSXZTW61}</span></span><span style="color: #010101; font-family: 'TIMES NEW ROMAN';"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span></span><span style="color: #010101; font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-size: 8pt;">_{ESTRELLITA ORELLANA GUEVARA - INSPECTOR/A INSTRUCTOR/A}</span></span></div> </td> <td style="border: solid #010101 0px;" align="left" valign="top" width="218"> <div align="justify"><span style="color: #010101; font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-size: 8pt;"></span></span></div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td style="border: solid #010101 0px;" align="left" valign="top" width="218"> <div align="justify"><img src=" The text provided appears to be a corrupted base64-encoded image or binary data fragment, followed by HTML table formatting with Spanish boilerplate text:

- The first part (`aR/D/AMZPiovmSPG7KP8AhI...`) is a base64 string that likely represents an image or file, which cannot be meaningfully translated. - The HTML contains formatting for a document header/footer with the following translatable Spanish elements: - `<sub>JOSE FRANCISCO LÓPEZ CHAVERRI - INSPECTOR/A INSTRUCTOR/A</sub>` → **JOSE FRANCISCO LÓPEZ CHAVERRI - INSPECTING/INSTRUCTING INSPECTOR** - `<sub>EXP: 19-003305-0031-DI</sub>` → Preserved verbatim as an expediente number. - `Edificio O.I.J.` → **O.I.J. Building** (O.I.J. is a Costa Rican institutional acronym, preserved).

However, per the instruction to provide ONLY the English translation, with no preamble or commentary, and since the source contains no coherent continuous text to translate besides the HTML boilerplate, the output is as follows:

JOSE FRANCISCO LÓPEZ CHAVERRI - INSPECTING/INSTRUCTING INSPECTOR O.I.J. Building First Floor Telephones: 2295-3729 or 2295-3730 or 2295-4338. Fax: 2257-5592. Email: [email protected] IV- REGARDING THE MERITS OF THE CASE:

This summary proceeding (sumaria) was initiated based on the complaint filed on September twenty-third, two thousand nineteen, by Ms. [Name 007], who brought to the attention of this disciplinary body that she had become a fiduciary guarantor (garante fiduciaria) for the credit operations undertaken by the investigated party, [Name 001], with the entity COOPESERVIDORES and CAPREDE, based on information provided by the defendant which later proved to be untrue. After analyzing said communication, the designated investigating body, by resolution issued at ten hours and fifty-nine minutes on September twenty-sixth, two thousand nineteen, opened the present disciplinary proceeding. Once the initial order was communicated to the defendant, he responded to the claim made, arguing the health breakdown of his wife, a situation which at the time affected the household's economic situation. He also stated that the sales executive of the financial entity, Mr. [Name 010], neither allowed him, nor considered it appropriate, to include the credit acquired with COOPESERVIDORES within the debt consolidation loan (préstamo por refundición de deudas), because the priority was to pay off obligations with other companies with higher interest, which would allow him greater liquidity. A situation that he assures was known to Ms. [Name 007], whom he informed transparently and without deception that said loan could not be paid off. Regarding the request by Ms. [Name 007] for the substitution of the fiduciary guarantee (garantía fiduciaria), he asserts that when he managed to contact the appropriate person to get in touch and reach an arrangement, Ms. [Name 007] refused to communicate with that person, a situation which generated a negative result; furthermore, he proceeded to explain to the complainant that he would pay off said obligations with the sale of some properties he received from an inheritance. Finally, he argues that he is currently processing a credit for debt consolidation with ANEJUD, with which he intends to resolve the payment of said obligations.

In accordance with Article 174 of the Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, the disciplinary regime aims to ensure the efficiency, correctness, and decorum of the functions entrusted to the Judicial Branch and to guarantee the public a correct administration of justice. In view of this principle, the Judicial Branch, as an employer, is responsible for determining the fulfillment of the tasks assigned to judicial officials, with the understanding that if conduct contrary to institutional tenets is observed, the application of the disciplinary regime will be necessary. Regarding the duties of the adjudicator, the Administrative and Civil Treasury Appeals Court, Fourth Section, ruling number 33-2013, of fourteen hours forty-five minutes on April twenty-third, two thousand thirteen, has stated: “Correlative with the previous rights, the public servant holds a series of employment-related obligations, inherent to the public purposes sought through their activity and which must always guide their management, so as not to incur a personal fault generating disciplinary liability. Without being exhaustive, some of the duties inherent to the public employment regime are: a) duty of probity (Art. 3 Ley contra la Corrupción y el Enriquecimiento Ilícito en la Administración Pública), b) duty to comply with the principles of public service - continuity, efficiency, adaptation to changes in the legal regime, and equal treatment - (Art. 4 Ley General de la Administración Pública), c) duty to safeguard an adequate internal control environment (Art. 39 of the Ley General de Control Interno), d) duty to protect the best interests of children (Arts. 4 and 5 of the Código de la Niñez y la Adolescencia), e) duty to comply with the legal system (Art. 13 and concordant articles of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, Art. 39.a of the Estatuto de Servicio Civil), f) duty to provide prompt response and information to the user (Arts. 5 and 10 of the Ley de Protección al Ciudadano del Exceso de Requisitos y Trámites Administrativos), g) duty of obedience (Art. 108 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública), h) duty to act with effectiveness (Art.

of the Financial Administration and Public Budgets Law) i) duty to maintain decorum and provide due attention to the user (art. 114 of the General Public Administration Law and art. 39. d) and e) of the Civil Service Statute) j) duty to respond in case of having acted with malice (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave) (art. 199 and 211 General Public Administration Law) k) duty to abide by the Political Constitution (art. 11 of said normative body). Additionally, on a supplementary basis, based on article 9 of the General Public Administration Law and 51 of the indicated Statute, the provisions of the Labor Code and other provisions related to the employment relationship are applicable to said public employment relationship, such as the Law on Sexual Harassment in Employment and Teaching, the Law on Smoking Regulation, the Law on Equal Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities, among others. In this vein, although in matters of public employment we cannot speak of a full integration of the legal system and principles in labor matters given the existence of a statutory and not contractual relationship (article 111 of the General Public Administration Law), the existence of general lines of orientation of the relationship that are common cannot be ignored, such as, for example, the application of the principle of good faith between both parties, contemplated in article 19 of the Labor Code". In order to issue a ruling in accordance with the legal framework that regulates the disciplinary process, we proceed to assess the evidentiary means incorporated into this disciplinary summary proceeding. In addition to what has already been stated, in attention to the special subjection to the service with this Branch of the Republic, it allows us to conclude the voluntary submission to the fulfillment of the functional duties and the ethical values that should distinguish the judicial collective. In this line of thought, from the citation under examination, duties derive that should not be exclusive to public management; some of them are applicable to private life, such as the duties of probity, maintaining decorum, responding in case of having acted with malice (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave), as well as the application of the principle of good faith. For the purpose of examining the appropriateness of applying disciplinary control, we proceed to the substantiation of the evidentiary material provided to the case file. The fault attributed to the investigated person is of a severity that has warranted the instruction of this disciplinary summary proceeding by the investigating body, since conduct showing total disregard for dignity, decorum, honesty, good faith, and rectitude in private life is not expected of judiciary personnel. It is considered proven not only because the defendant does not refute it, but also because from the abundant documentary evidence it is considered proven that the defendant, in the year two thousand twelve, spoke with Mrs. [Nombre 007] in order to propose her as a fiduciary guarantee for obtaining a loan from the entity COOPESERVIDORES. Regarding this fact, the complainant reports that the request for that fiduciary guarantee was to cover a credit operation for the sum of five million; however, at the moment she appeared before the Cooperative entity, she found out that the amount of obligation number 1012-3030-183877 was for a larger figure, exactly for the amount of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones (image 8). Based on this factual scenario, it is necessary to examine the supporting elements incorporated into this disciplinary summary proceeding. The accused, in his response brief, has not refuted this attributed fact; he merely tried to provide justification for the default incurred with said financial entity. In addition to what has been said, the deponent [Nombre 011] stated that Mrs. [Nombre 007] told her that the defendant had asked her for a surety bond for the amount of five million, but at the time of signing it was about eight million colones. The declarant affirms that this comment was made to her in the year two thousand twelve, as part of her experience as a guarantor. In addition to what has already been expressed, the arguments presented by the defendant lack suitability to disqualify the testimony of Mrs. [Nombre 011], who presented her account spontaneously and which also appears credible. Thus, it is considered proven that the defendant, disregarding the duty of honesty and good faith, misrepresented the truth at the initial moment of informing Mrs. [Nombre 007] of the conditions regarding the total amount of the debt, and through less-than-transparent information, obtained the fiduciary guarantee from the entity COOPESERVIDORES, in credit operation number 1012-303-183877, for an amount of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones. This disciplinary authority considers that the defensive argument presented based on the health reasons of his wife and the impact on the family economy are not acceptable to justify the fault described in the accusatory document. On this topic, it is worth noting, from a legal perspective, that a personal guarantee consists of a legal transaction in which the payment of a credit obligation contracted by a third party with a financial entity is backed. However, from a general understanding, the fiduciary guarantee is based on the trust of the guarantor that the debtor person will be responsible for paying each of the installments until the entire credit operation is canceled. Within this same sphere of trust, the debtor person must transparently and honestly inform about the conditions of the credit management, namely, the exact amount, the term for debt payment, as well as the amount of each of the monthly installments. Likewise, in the event of a situation that makes it impossible to pay some of the agreed installments, timely and truthful communication must be made with the credit guarantor, in order to prevent the guarantor's assets from being affected unexpectedly. To this effect, in the year two thousand twelve, the defendant requested the fiduciary guarantee of Mrs. [Nombre 007] for a credit operation in the amount of five million colones with the entity COOPESERVIDORES; however, on the thirteenth of August of the same year, at the moment of appearing before the entity to formalize the proceedings in her capacity as fiduciary guarantor, she found out that the amount to be guaranteed was for the sum of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones. This fact has been considered proven not only through the account of Mrs. [Nombre 007], who appeared confident and emphatic in her testimony, but also, her version has been corroborated by the testimony of Mrs. [Nombre 011], who not only confirmed what the complainant stated but also recounted her own feeling of being deceived. The defrauding conduct of the investigated person is regrettable, to the detriment of Mrs. [Nombre 007], from whom he not only obtained the fiduciary guarantee through deception regarding the amount of the credit operation to be guaranteed, but also, in the year two thousand seventeen, he failed in the duty of honesty and responsibility to comply with the payment of the monthly installments for the sum of seventy-two thousand seven hundred twenty-one colones and fifty-three céntimos. This situation caused the creditor entity to resort to deducting the unpaid monthly installments from the salary amount of Mrs. [Nombre 007]. This fact has been acknowledged by the accused, arguing a health problem affecting his wife during the period between the months of February and August of the year two thousand seventeen, a situation that caused an impact on the family economy, since he incurred expenses for medications, private care, transportation, disability deductions, and hiring personnel to assist with domestic tasks, in addition to attending to the family mortgage that must be paid from his salary. While it is true that the defendant provides his wife's medical discharge summary, with the intent of demonstrating the health breakdown, it is also true that it was issued by the emergency service of the Hospital México of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social) (image 51-52), documentation that is insufficient to support the defensive argument regarding expenses for private medical care, transportation, disabilities, and hiring personnel to perform domestic tasks. This disciplinary authority does not ignore the heavy investment generated by doctor and private pharmacy expenses; however, this being said, the mere demonstration of a health breakdown, per se, does not confirm the outlays for these items, much less that they generated the economic detriment invoked by the investigated person. Acquiring a credit obligation requires healthy and responsible planning, so that in the eventual case that a worsening of assets must be faced, the impact on the economy is not invasive, and even less so, affects credibility and trust before third parties, since as part of the judicial staff, it is incumbent upon them to seriously assume the management of personal finances. This disciplinary authority has proceeded to examine the merits of the case file, finding them completely devoid of demonstrating the impact on the family economy; thus, the argument presented by the defendant lacks sufficient evidentiary support to justify the non-payment of the monthly installments. It should be remembered that acquiring a credit obligation comes from a responsible act, as a consequence of conscientious planning, based on an orderly and responsible budget of finances. Well then, regarding the installments deducted from the complainant's salary, the defendant states that he has proceeded to pay the monthly amounts deducted from the complainant. Far from justifying the reproached conduct, this is suitable to demonstrate a carefree, irresponsible, and negligent behavior by the defendant regarding his duties as principal debtor before COOPESERVIDORES, to the point that he had to resort to the fiduciary guarantee to resolve the non-payment of two overdue installments for the months of April, August, and December, all dates of the year two thousand eighteen. The same documentation provided by the defendant demonstrates a forced and late fulfillment of the credit debt, not to mention that the different payment receipts to various financial entities provided by the accused demonstrate further indebtedness relative to income sources, and consequently causes unjustified non-compliance in the payment of the defendant's credit operations, a situation that, as noted in previous lines, corroborates irresponsible management far from a planned and healthy budget, thus proving the accusatory hypothesis. Regarding the credit operation processed before the entity CAPREDE, the complainant states that in the month of June of the year two thousand sixteen, the investigated person contacted her again, arguing that he would process a mortgage loan on his dwelling house with the entity CAPREDE, for the purpose of a debt consolidation, in which he would include the credit with the entity COOPESERVIDORES, in which she acted as guarantor. Subsequently, he communicated again with Mrs. [Nombre 007], alleging that the documents for the property were not ready for submission and therefore he needed her to act as a fiduciary guarantee only for one or two weeks, while the appraisal of the property to be mortgaged was presented to formalize said real guarantee, and once the mortgage loan for the sum of twenty-three million colones was formalized, she would be excluded from the surety bond constituted with the entities CAPREDE and COOPESERVIDORES. However, after a period of fifteen days had passed, Mrs. [Nombre 007] asked the defendant about the substitution of the mortgage bond, receiving a response that everything would be fixed and it was a matter of time. However, in the month of July of the year two thousand sixteen, Mrs. [Nombre 007] decided to appear at CAPREDE, at which time she found out that in file number [Valor 006], the change of guarantee did not exist and had not been considered, and furthermore, she found out that the credit operation with COOPESERVIDORES had not been included in the debt consolidation plan presented before CAPREDE. On this matter, the defendant affirms that the guarantee was requested based on the friendship and trust that had existed for many years with the complainant, without her being deceived or induced into error. He alleges that the operation before CAPREDE for the balance of twenty-one million six hundred seventeen thousand seven hundred fifty-four colones is completely up to date, and furthermore, he acquired said mortgage loan with the intention of canceling the contracted operation; however, the account executive, Mr. [Nombre 010], did not consider it appropriate, since the priority was to cancel other obligations acquired with other companies with higher interest, in order to obtain greater liquidity. He maintains that, in a transparent manner and without any deception, he informed Mrs. [Nombre 007] that the loan with COOPERSERVIDORES could not be canceled. Having examined the case file, it is observed that a certification from the entity CAPREDE indeed appears in the file, from which the condition of Mrs. [Nombre 007] as fiduciary guarantor of the credit operation for the amount of twenty-three million thirty-five thousand colones, under the special debt consolidation plan (image 72), is deduced. Now then, the complainant ratified her complaint at the evidentiary hearing, and regarding the conditions of the guarantee, the deponent [Nombre 011] stated that the complainant was very happy because the defendant told her he was going to finalize the loan with COOPESERVIDORES, but due to an error in the registry studies, he asked Mrs. [Nombre 007] and a fellow female judge for a temporary surety bond while the papers were being processed. Afterwards, she was very anguished and sad because she realized that she was not a temporary guarantor, but for a much longer time. She adds that the events occurred around mid-year two thousand sixteen, a date she remembers well, because she was about to move to the collections unit and they had to leave the office up to date. Continuing with the study of the documentary evidence, the certificate issued by CAPREDE corroborates the declarant's account regarding her condition as fiduciary guarantor as well as that of Mrs. [Nombre 014], who at that time formed part of the judiciary. Likewise, the accused acknowledges that the credit with COOPERSERVIDORES was not part of the debt consolidation plan, due to the account executive's advice. Pursuant to numeral 298 of the General Public Administration Law, it states: "1.- The means of proof may be all those permitted by public law, even if they are not admissible by common law. 2.- Unless otherwise provided, the evidence shall be assessed in accordance with the rules of sound judgment (sana crítica)." Sound judgment (sana crítica) has been conceived as the exercise of assessing the results of the evidence, which allow the operator to discern what is true from what is false, through the application of logic, science, and experience, under the exercise of prudence and objectivity in direct relation to a given matter. In summary, these are the rules of correct human understanding, on an average plane, without the excessive rigor of assessed evidence, nor the uncertainty of free conviction. Under this concept, this authority finds the testimony of Mrs. [Nombre 011] credible, which is not limited to replicating the narrative of Mrs. [Nombre 007]; she also describes the state of anguish and sadness of the complainant upon learning that it was not a temporary surety bond and that she also did not understand the credit obligation acquired at COOPESERVIDORES, in which she appeared as guarantor. In addition to what has been stated, the consent of the complainant to guarantee the credit obligation for the amount of twenty-three million is understandable, under the promise of a temporary guarantee, in addition to the commitment to cancel the credit acquired with the entity COOPESERVIDORES and consequently be released from her condition as guarantor. In accordance with the facts described in the accusatory document, it is necessary to resort to the provisions of numeral 49 subsection c) of the Judicial Service Statute, which provides: "In addition to the specific duties established by the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch, judicial employees shall have the following: c) Observe dignity in the performance of their position and in their private life." In accordance with the cited regulations, judicial personnel must observe honest, responsible, and probative conduct. This authority emphasizes that the accused has based his defense on the subscription of a new loan based on the pension fund through ANEJUD; however, the case file is devoid of elements of conviction that conclusively corroborate the intention to seek a sound and responsible means to release the complainant from the fiduciary guarantees before the entities COOPESERVIDORES and CAPREDE. The same reasoning applies to the argument regarding the sale of properties to pay said obligations; however, the case file is devoid of demonstrating the efforts to sell the properties, a circumstance that reveals that the accused indeed distorts the factual events, for the purpose of benefiting himself, in total disregard for the economic consequences that could be generated for third parties who at the time offered him support. Thus, it is also possible to corroborate a conduct prone to irresponsible and disorderly over-indebtedness, without denoting any intention to release the complainant from the condition of guarantor for the contracted obligations. Another aspect that must be mentioned by this disciplinary body is the threatening attitude on the part of the accused at the moment the complainant informed him of her decision to file the complaint before the Judicial Inspection. The accused assures that he has never uttered any threat to Mrs. [Nombre 007]; he argues that he has treated her with utmost respect and has always been in contact with her to explain the economic solutions to try to resolve the situation. In order to verify the threatening comments, the complainant provided screenshots of messages via the WhatsApp platform, from which comments aimed at intimidating, frightening, or threatening Mrs. [Nombre 007] can be seen, with the purpose of discouraging her from filing the complaint before this disciplinary instance. In this regard, we see: "Como dice eso. Si me echan la embargan a usted. Nos hundimos los dos" (...) "Le cae Caprede. No es amenaza. Es la lógica. Esta semana pongo al día Coopeservidores". On a primary level, it must be noted that the accused has not objected to the legitimacy of the messaging nor the authorship of the content; consequently, this authority finds no reason to disqualify the evidentiary material provided. Having expressed the above, it is clear to this disciplinary authority the intention of the defendant to once again distort the factual framework of the situation affecting the complainant, in an attempt to free himself from his disciplinary responsibility, under the premise that in the event of a revocation of his appointment, he would have to assume the amount of the credit and thus they would both sink. The attitude adopted by the accused concerning intimidating the complainant with the non-payment of the credit obligations, with the petty interest of evading his disciplinary responsibility, is extremely reprehensible. In this sense, it must be considered that judiciary personnel must adjust their conduct in accordance with Institutional values and the legal system, in order not to compromise the credibility of the judicial staff. In attention to the voluntary submission to the service of the judiciary, conduct contrary to the principles of honesty, responsibility, loyalty, integrity, and transparency is not expected. The Administration, in its capacity as employer, must ensure the correct performance of the judicial collective, especially when dealing with judiciary personnel from whom citizens expect probative and impeccable behavior in strict compliance with the ethical principles of trust, good faith, and responsibility that should distinguish those who represent the judiciary. In accordance with what has been expressed, this disciplinary authority considers that the conduct described in the accusatory document has been fully proven and, consequently, the defendant becomes subject to the application of the disciplinary regime. As a corollary of what has been expressed, the argument presented by the defendant does not exclude him from the disciplinary regime; as noted in previous lines, the accused was aware of the deterioration of his economy and still opted for irresponsible and disproportionate indebtedness. Finally, regarding the absence of malice (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave), our administrative liability regime distinguishes between administrative liability, whose criterion of imputation is objective, and the liability of the official or employee, which is subjective in nature, involving malice (dolo) and gross negligence (culpa grave) in the official's conduct; it is regulated in numeral 199.1 of the General Public Administration Law: "The public employee who has acted with malice (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave) in the performance of their functions, or on the occasion thereof, even if they have only used the means and opportunities offered by the position, shall be personally liable to third parties." Consequently, in light of the administrative legal system, what is relevant is to determine the concepts of "malice (dolo)" and "gross negligence (culpa grave)." The Administrative Litigation Court, Section V, in Resolution Nº 00006 - 2012 of February 1, 2012, has referred to the topic as follows: "the first concept refers to the will and intentionality in the harmful act, while the second, although it does not allude to the lack of foresight, intention, and will in causing the damage, the damage occurs, but due to negligence, imprudence, and lack of skill. That is, the official could have foreseen or avoided the damage and did not do so." In other words, regarding faults attributed to an official, the severity thereof is a relevant aspect in order to impute liability to the employee. An interpretation to the contrary would mean that the employee would not respond personally, since the conduct must be malicious or negligent. The same norm, in its subsections 2, 3, and 4, is responsible for clarifying the situations under which one would be in those cases; thus, it indicates that both the official who issues manifestly illegal acts, and the one who obeys them, acts with gross negligence (culpa grave). "For the existence of subjective liability, the concurrence of damage, malice (dolo) or negligence (culpa) on the part of the author of the harmful act, and the causal relationship between the conduct that produces it and the damage is required; taking into account that the latter must be demonstrated and that the negligence (culpa) that will serve as our criterion of imputation must be serious. By reason of what has been indicated, the determination of the malice (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave) of the employee(s) is fundamental for the attribution of subjective liability." (Administrative Litigation Court, Section V, Ibidem).

In the present case, as declared by the complainant and corroborated by the testimony of [Nombre 011], it is evident that the accused has acted with deception and thereby obtained a benefit for himself, defrauding the trust of the complainant. In this regard, the accusatory hypothesis described in the opening order has been demonstrated, concerning improper conduct that contravenes the duties to observe dignity, decorum, honesty, and rectitude in his private life, and consequently he merits the application of the disciplinary regime.

Regarding the defendant's thesis concerning a new vision of the Judicial Branch with the purpose of referring the present matter to the Restorative Justice Program, requested in a brief dated September ninth of this year. It is considered appropriate to note, in accordance with the provisions of numeral 28 of the Regulation of the Restorative Justice Program, that it establishes a maximum period of three months in the proceeding for the process to be referred to said program, starting from the issuance of the Statement of Charges. In the case now before us, the opening order was issued at ten hours and fifty-nine minutes on September twenty-sixth, two thousand nineteen; as can be observed, by the date of the defendant's formulation, the process has generously exceeded the period set forth in the cited Regulation. Consequently, the petition filed by the defendant is not admissible.

**V.- LEGAL CLASSIFICATION AND SANCTION: THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY AND REASONABLENESS IN THE SANCTION TO BE IMPOSED:** In consideration of the principles of proportionality and reasonableness, doctrinal writers such as Alfonso Chacón Mata have noted regarding proportionality: "… disciplinary administrative law must draw sustenance from the guarantees inherent to due process, and for this reason, before imposing a sanction, it must pass through the screening of first-order constitutional guarantees that respect the rights to be heard, to information, and to defense as main axes. The sanctioning nature arises from the need to maintain a fair balance between authority and liberty: pillars of democratic coexistence within a Rule of Law State…" (Civil Service Magazine, General Directorate of Civil Service. Ministry of the Presidency of Costa Rica, No. 20-21, July 2007, Nature and Purposes of Disciplinary Law, Chacón Mata, Alfonso). Regarding reasonableness, Article XXIII of the Session of the Superior Council 28-09 of March twenty-fourth, two thousand nine, on the subject indicated: "…Nonetheless, the principles of proportionality and reasonableness of the sanction must be invoked, for which it is necessary to consider ruling No. 8858-98 of December 15, 1998, from the Constitutional Chamber, which states the following: '…A rights-limiting act is reasonable when it meets a triple condition: it must be necessary, suitable, and proportional. The necessity of a measure makes direct reference to the existence of a factual basis that makes it essential to protect some good or set of goods of the community—or of a specific group—through the adoption of a differentiating measure. That is, if such action is not taken, important public interests will be harmed. If the limitation is not necessary, it cannot be considered reasonable, and therefore, constitutionally valid. Suitability, for its part, involves a judgment regarding whether the type of restriction to be adopted fulfills or does not fulfill the purpose of satisfying the identified need. The unsuitability of the measure would indicate that other mechanisms may exist that better solve the existing need, some of which could fulfill the proposed purpose without restricting the enjoyment of the right in question. For its part, proportionality refers us to a judgment of necessary comparison between the purpose pursued by the act and the type of restriction imposed or intended to be imposed, such that the limitation is not markedly greater in magnitude than the benefit it seeks to obtain for the benefit of the community. Of the last two elements, it could be said that the first is based on a qualitative judgment, while the second starts from a quantitative comparison of the two objects analyzed...'". In light of the foregoing, the demonstrated conduct is classified as grave in the terms indicated by numeral 192, subsection 9) of the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch; the accused has incurred conduct far removed from what is expected of judicial personnel. Resorting to deception with the purpose of obtaining a fiduciary guarantee is highly reprehensible; likewise, the intimidating attitude carried out through WhatsApp platform messaging against the complainant, with the sole purpose of evading disciplinary responsibility, is censurable. An attitude that weakens the citizenry's credibility in judicial personnel, from whom transparent, upright, honest, responsible conduct, adhering to the principle of good faith, is expected. Inevitably, the gravity of the demonstrated facts does not merit the application of the least of the sanctions provided for by numeral 195, last paragraph; resorting to deception for the purpose of obtaining a benefit for one's own gain is extremely reprehensible, conduct that has been observed throughout this process, attempting to show that he is dealing with a solution to the situation the complainant faces, without providing the slightest supporting element, thus defrauding the complainant's trust. In consideration of the foregoing, the sanction of ONE MONTH OF SUSPENSION FROM THE POSITION WITHOUT PAY is imposed on [Nombre 001], at the time of the facts, Judge of the Administrative Litigation Court (Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo). The motivation for the imposition of this sanction lies in a fraudulent action with the purpose of obtaining a fiduciary guarantee through deception, on the first occasion in a credit transaction for an amount greater than what was reported to [Nombre 007], with the entity COOPERSERVIDORES, and on the second occasion before CAPREDE, under the promise of a loan for debt consolidation (refundición de deudas) in which the transaction contracted with the entity COOPESERVIDORES would be included, in addition to the commitment of a temporary guarantee, all of the above taking advantage of years of close friendship, despite having full knowledge of the weakening of his economic situation, and even so, he decided to contract a new significant credit obligation, securing the fiduciary guarantee under the promise of a temporary guarantee in a debt consolidation loan that encompassed the obligation with the entity COOPESERVIDORES. The agreed measure is based on the gravity of the offenses for which the accused was found responsible, weighed against the purposes of the disciplinary process, which aims to assign sanctions tending to suppress conduct such as that noted, such that the sanction now agreed upon becomes the only punitive measure possible to apply considering the particularities set forth throughout this ruling. The sanctioned individual is informed that, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 66, subsection 5, and 209 ibidem, they have the right to appeal this decision before the Superior Council of the Judicial Branch (Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial) within the third day; prior to referral to the Superior Council, the sanctioned individual has the right to petition before the Labor Relations Commission (Comisión de Relaciones Laborales). The Presidency of the Supreme Court of Justice (Corte Suprema de Justicia) is requested to inform this Tribunal and the Human Resources Department (Departamento de Gestión Humana) of the dates on which the administrative act issued herein will be executed, in accordance with the provisions of numeral 228 of the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública)." </sub></strong></span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> _{That without specifying an exact date, but from the month of January of the year two thousand nineteen until August of that same year and in the face of repeated telephone calls and text messages from Mrs.}</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> _{[Name 007]}</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">_{, requesting that you resolve the conflict, you}</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">_{[Name 001]}</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">_{, stated that it was not viable to resolve the situation of payment defaults, because you lacked liquidity and, furthermore, you assured that you were about to receive an inheritance and payment as an interim executor, with which you would proceed to regularize your financial situation.}</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><strong>_12.</strong></span> <span style="font-size: 12pt;">_{That without specifying an exact date, but from the month of January of the year two thousand nineteen until August of that same year, when Mrs.}</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">_{[Name 007]}</span> <span style="font-size: 12pt;">_{, expressed her intention to resort to the Judicial Inspection due to the previously indicated facts, you}</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">_{[Name 001]}</span> <span style="font-size: 12pt;">_{responded in a threatening manner, telling her that she did not know who you were nor who Mrs.}</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">_{[Name 007]}</span> <span style="font-size: 12pt;">_{was dealing with, which generated fear in the latter due to the fact that you could cause her some grievance directly against her or her family." (Sic)}</span></span> **II.-** The defendant [Name 001], was duly notified of the opening order on the first day of October of the year two thousand nineteen (notification record at image 41 incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/10/2019), answered in the terms of his brief at images 42-50, document incorporated into the virtual case file on 09/10/2019).

**III.-** This resolution is issued within the legal deadlines, without noting defects or omissions capable of causing nullity or defenselessness.

Drafted by the Inspectora General Judicial, Orellana Guevara; and.

***CONSIDERING*** **I.- PROCEDURAL ASPECTS:** ***Material Error:*** In the oral and private evidentiary hearing, the investigating body requested that the date indicated in the second fact of the opening act be considered a material error and henceforth be read as "August of the year two thousand twelve." **It is resolved:** A material error is defined as that mistake made by the legal operator, however, from an integral reading, it is appreciated that it is an evident error, since it does not substantively modify what was resolved. In the case at hand, from a concatenated reading of the second and third facts of the initial order, an evident error in the indicated year is appreciated. In this regard, note that fact 2 indicates: "*but for the month of August of two thousand nineteen, you* [Name 001]*, requested collaboration from Mrs.* [Name 007]*, so that the latter would act as a fiduciary guarantor for a loan in your name at COOPESERVIDORES*". Fact 3 reports: "*at the time of formalizing said loan on the thirteenth of August of the year two thousand twelve, through operation number 1012-303-183877 and being in the offices of said cooperative*". From a correct reading, it is evident that it is a simple material error in the year recorded, and in that sense, the error noted by the investigating body is corrected, the correct date being "**August of the year two thousand twelve**". ***Regarding evidence for better resolution:*** In accordance with the provisions of numeral 204 of the Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, the collection of evidence for better resolution may be proposed in the concluding arguments brief. Article 41.3 of the Código Procesal Civil regulates the matter of complementary evidence, alluding to a discretionary power that the jurisdictional authority—in this case administrative—may use when there is some point subject to litigation requiring further information or clarity. As a specific condition, it must be noted that this type of offering cannot be used by the parties to remedy omissions incurred in relation to evidentiary elements that could well have been offered at the opportune procedural stage. In view of this, the deciding body is empowered to deny the request made without the need for any resolution indicating so. In this regard, the matter has been repeatedly addressed by the Sala Primera de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, which, in a similar case, stated: "*... it must be remembered that evidence for better resolution, by its nature, is a power of the judge, who decides on its convenience and necessity and, for this reason, is not obliged to admit that offered by the parties. It is a faculty that allows them to annex, in the concluding phase, relevant evidentiary elements for the correct decision of the conflict. From this perspective, although it is licit to incorporate—for better resolution—entirely new evidence, as well as that which was declared unenforceable, null, rejected as untimely or inadmissible, or related to facts that were taken as true due to the defendant's default—cardinals 331 and 575 of the Código Procesal Civil—certainly, the decision to gather it corresponds to a discretionary assessment by the judge, who can dispense with it without the need for an express resolution.*" (Res. No. 408-A-S1-2012 of 14 hours 30 minutes on April 3, 2013). In the present proceeding, an attempt is made to introduce the testimony of Mr. [Name 010], as evidence for better resolution. In relation to this formulation, it must be noted that during the evidentiary hearing, the accused stated that it was not possible for him to contact the deponent; thus, the unjustified absence of the deponent can in no way be remedied through evidence for better provision at this procedural stage. The same reasoning applies to the documentary evidence presented together with the concluding arguments brief. As a consequence of the foregoing, the testimony offered as better resolution is rejected, since its nature is to remedy the unjustified absence of the witness from the convened hearing. Likewise, the documentary evidence provided with the concluding arguments brief is rejected, because it is documentary evidence that could well have been provided during the investigation process, and due to such negligence, it cannot be remedied by means of evidence for better provision.

**II.- PROVEN FACTS:** Of importance for the decision in this matter, the following facts are deemed proven: **a)** The investigated party [Name 001] holds the position of Judge 4 of the Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda of the Second Judicial Circuit. His record shows twenty-nine service years, and as of the date of the report, he has the following disciplinary sanctions: Written Reprimand, effective dates November eighth and ninth of the year two thousand nineteen (Service record report, at image 93, incorporated into the virtual case file on 11/10/2019, and Report of Disciplinary Sanctions and Corrections by Employee at image 167, incorporated into the virtual case file on 03/09/2020); **b)** The accused [Name 001], in the month of August of the year two thousand twelve, requested that Mrs. [Name 007] act as a fiduciary guarantor before the financial entity COOPERSERVIDORES, for the sum of exactly five million colones. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the loan was formalized on the thirteenth of August of the year two thousand twelve, for an amount of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones, through operation number 1012-303-183877 (See Consolidated Account Statement of COOPERSERVIODRES, at image 8, incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/09/2020, and the statement of deponent [Name 011]); **c)** The accused [Name 001], in the month of June of the year two thousand sixteen, again contacted Mrs. [Name 007] to request that she act as a fiduciary guarantor for just two weeks, before the financial entity CAPREDE, a period in which a mortgage guarantee would be processed to formalize a loan for the sum of twenty-three million colones, for debt consolidation, under the promise that the loan with the financial entity COOPESERVIDORES, in which she acted as fiduciary guarantor, would be included within the loan being managed for debt consolidation. Likewise, once the mortgage guarantee was formalized, she would be excluded as a fiduciary guarantor before the financial entity CAPREDE (See statement of [Name 011]); **d)** The loan formalization file number [Value 006], processed by the financial entity CAPREDE, does not contemplate, as part of the formalization, a change from a fiduciary guarantee to a mortgage guarantee. Nor was the loan acquired with the entity COOPESERVIDORES, in which Mrs. [Name 007] acts as fiduciary guarantor, included within the debt consolidation plan (See statement of [Name 011] and CAPREDE client account statement, at image 12, incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/09/2020); **e)** The accused [Name 001], has failed in his obligation to honor the corresponding payments for the loan operation with the entity COOPESERVIDORES. The default incurred by the investigated party caused that, starting from the month of December of the year two thousand seventeen, the creditor cooperative proceeded to make salary deductions for the sum of seventy-one thousand three hundred fifty colones, during the period from the month of December of the year two thousand seventeen to the month of September of the year two thousand nineteen (See certificate issued by COOPERSERVIDORES, at image 7, incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/09/2020); **f)** During the period from January to August of the year two thousand nineteen, he again defaulted on the loan obligation acquired with the entity COOPERSERVIDORES, reactivating the fiduciary guarantee, making bi-weekly deductions from the salary of Mrs. [Name 007], for an amount during the mentioned period of two million twenty-four thousand three hundred sixty-three colones with twenty-eight cents (See salary certificate of Mrs. [Name 007] at images 9-11, incorporated into the virtual case file on 02/09/2020); **g)** Without specifying an exact date, but during the period from January to August of the year two thousand nineteen, upon learning that he was going to be reported to this disciplinary body, the defendant [Name 001] told Mrs. [Name 007], "*As they say. If they fire me, they garnish you. We both sink*" (...) "*Caprede will come after you. It's not a threat. It's logical. This week I'll bring Coopeservidores up to date*". (See messaging via the WhatsApp platform, at image 166, incorporated into the virtual case file on 15/06/2020).

**III.- UNPROVEN FACTS.** No probative material was brought to the case file to demonstrate **a)** That the financial entity CAPREDE did not authorize the accused to include the COOPESERVIDORES loan, in which Mrs. [Name 007] acts as fiduciary guarantor, within the debt consolidation plan (No useful probative material was provided); **b)** That Mrs. [Name 007] refused to be replaced as fiduciary guarantor of the credit operation acquired with the entity CAPREDE (No useful probative material was provided); **c)** That the accused incurred expenses for private medical care and domestic service (No useful probative material was provided); **d)** That the defendant is processing a loan based on the pension fund through ANEJUD (No useful probative material was provided); **e)** That the investigated party is carrying out efforts to sell real estate (No useful probative material was provided).

**IV- ON THE MERITS OF THE MATTER:** This summary proceeding was initiated based on the complaint filed on the twenty-third of September of the year two thousand nineteen, by Mrs. [Name 007], who made known to this disciplinary body that she had acted as a fiduciary guarantor for the loan operations contracted by the investigated party [Name 001] with the entities COOPESERVIDORES and CAPREDE, based on the information provided to her by the defendant, which later turned out to be untrue. Once said communication was analyzed, the designated investigating body, by resolution of ten hours and fifty-nine minutes on the twenty-sixth of September of the year two thousand nineteen, opened this disciplinary proceeding. Once the initial order was communicated to the accused, he proceeded to respond to the request made, arguing the health breakdown of his wife, a situation which at the time affected the household's economic situation. He also stated that the sales executive of the financial entity, Mr. [Name 010], did not allow him, nor considered it appropriate, to incorporate the loan acquired with COOPESERVIDORES into the debt consolidation loan, because the priority was to cancel obligations with other companies with higher interest, which would allow him greater liquidity. A situation he assures was known to Mrs. [Name 007], whom he informed transparently and without deception that said loan could not be canceled. Regarding Mrs. [Name 007]'s request about the substitution of fiduciary guarantee, he asserts that when he managed to contact the appropriate person to get in touch and reach an arrangement, Mrs. [Name 007] refused to communicate with said person, a situation that led to a negative result; furthermore, he proceeded to explain to the complainant that he would cancel said obligations with the sale of some properties he received from an inheritance. Finally, he argues that he is currently managing a loan for debt consolidation through ANEJUD, with which he intends to solve the payment of said obligations. In accordance with ordinal 174 of the Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, the disciplinary regime aims to ensure the efficiency, correctness, and decorum of the functions entrusted to the Judicial Branch and to guarantee citizens a correct administration of justice. In accordance with this principle, it is the responsibility of the Judicial Branch, as an employer, to determine compliance with the assigned duties of judicial officials, under the understanding that if conduct contrary to institutional postulates is observed, the application of the disciplinary regime will be necessary. Regarding the duties of a judge, the Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda, Sección Cuarta, has ruled in vote number 33-2013, of fourteen hours and forty-five minutes on the twenty-third of April of the year two thousand thirteen. "*Correlative to the above rights, the public servant has a series of employment-related obligations, inherent to the public aims pursued by their activity and which must always guide their performance, so as not to incur a personal fault generating disciplinary responsibility. Without attempting to be exhaustive, some of the duties inherent to the public employment regime are: a) duty of probity (art. 3 Ley contra la Corrupción y el Enriquecimiento Ilícito en la Administración Pública), b) duty to comply with the principles of public service - continuity, efficiency, adaptation to changes in the legal regime, and equality of treatment - (art. 4 Ley General de la Administración Pública), c) duty to safeguard an adequate internal control environment (art. 39 of the Ley General de Control Interno) d) duty to protect the best interests of children (art. 4 and 5 of the Código de la Niñez y la Adolescencia) e) duty to comply with the legal system (art. 13 and concordant articles of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, art. 39.a of the Estatuto de Servicio Civil), f) duty to provide prompt response and information to the user (art. 5 and 10 of the Ley de Protección al Ciudadano del Exceso de Requisitos y Trámites Administrativos), g) duty of obedience (art. 108 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública), h) duty to act with effectiveness (art. 5 of the Ley de la Administración Financiera y Presupuestos Públicos) i) duty to maintain decorum and provide due attention to the user (art. 114 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública and art. 39. d) and e) of the Estatuto de Servicio Civil) j) duty to answer in case of having acted with intent or gross negligence (art. 199 and 211 Ley General de la Administración Pública) k) duty to abide by the Constitución Política (art. 11 of said normative body). Additionally, supplementarily, based on article 9 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública and 51 of the aforementioned Estatuto, the provisions of the Código de Trabajo and other provisions related to the employment relationship are applicable to said public employment relationship, such as the Ley de Hostigamiento Sexual en el Empleo y la Docencia, Ley de Regulación del Fumado, Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para Personas con Discapacidad, among others. In this sense, although in matters of public employment we cannot speak of a full integration of the legal system and principles in labor matters, given the existence of a statutory and not contractual relationship (article 111 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública), the existence of general guidelines for the relationship that are common cannot be ignored, such as, for example, the application of the principle of good faith between both parties, contemplated in article 19 of the Código de Trabajo*". With the purpose of issuing a ruling in accordance with the regulations governing the disciplinary process, an assessment of the evidentiary means incorporated into this disciplinary summary is carried out. In addition to the foregoing, in consideration of the special subjection to service with this Branch of the Republic, it allows concluding the voluntary submission to the fulfillment of the functional duties and ethical values that must distinguish the judicial collective.

In this line of thought, it follows from the cited examination that duties should not be exclusive to public management; some of them apply to private life, such as the duties of probity, maintaining decorum, being accountable in cases of having acted with intent (dolo) or gross negligence (culpa grave), and the application of the principle of good faith (principio de buena fe). In order to examine the appropriateness of applying disciplinary control, the evidentiary material contributed to the case file is substantiated. The misconduct attributed to the investigated party is so serious that it has warranted the initiation of this disciplinary summary proceeding (sumaria disciplinaria) by the investigating body, since conduct in total disregard for dignity, decorum, honesty, good faith, and rectitude in private life is not expected of judiciary personnel. This is considered proven not only because the accused does not refute it, but also because the abundant documentary evidence proves that in the year two thousand twelve, the accused spoke with Ms. [Name 007] in order to propose her as a fiduciary guarantor (garantía fiduciaria) for obtaining a loan from the entity COOPESERVIDORES. Regarding this fact, the complainant reports that the request for that fiduciary guarantee was supposedly for a credit operation in the amount of five million, but when she appeared before the Cooperative entity, she learned that the amount of obligation number 1012-3030-183877 was for a larger sum, exactly eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones (image 8). Based on this factual scenario, it is necessary to examine the supporting elements included in this disciplinary summary proceeding. The defendant in his answering brief has not refuted this attributed fact; he merely attempted to provide justification for the default incurred with said financial entity. In addition to the above, deponent [Name 011] stated that Ms. [Name 007] told her that the accused had asked her for a surety bond (fianza) in the amount of five million, but when it came time to sign, it was around eight million colones. The deponent affirms that this comment was made to her in the year two thousand twelve, as part of her experience as a surety (fiadora). Furthermore, the arguments put forth by the accused lack suitability to disqualify the testimony of Ms. [Name 011], who presented her account spontaneously and who also appears credible. Therefore, it is considered proven that the accused, disregarding the duty of honesty and good faith, failed to tell the truth at the initial moment of informing Ms. [Name 007] of the conditions of the total debt amount and, through untransparent information, obtained the fiduciary guarantee from the entity COOPESERVIDORES for credit operation number 1012-303-183877, in the amount of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones. This disciplinary authority considers that the defense argument based on his wife's health issues and the impact on the family economy are not acceptable to justify the misconduct described in the accusatory pleading. On this topic, it is worth noting, from a legal perspective, that the personal guarantee (garantía personal) consists of a legal transaction backing the payment of a credit obligation contracted by a third party with a financial entity. However, from a general understanding, the fiduciary guarantee is based on the trust of the guarantor (garante) that the debtor will be responsible for paying each installment until the entire credit operation is cancelled. In this same area of trust, the debtor must transparently and honestly inform the guarantor of the conditions of the credit management, namely, the exact amount, the debt payment term, and the amount of each monthly installment. Likewise, in case of a situation that makes it impossible to pay some of the agreed installments, timely and truthful communication must be made with the credit guarantor, in order to prevent the guarantor's assets from being unexpectedly affected. In effect, in the year two thousand twelve, the accused requested the fiduciary guarantee of Ms. [Name 007] for a credit operation in the amount of five million colones with the entity COOPESERVIDORES; however, on August thirteenth of the same year, when she appeared before the entity to formalize the proceedings in her capacity as fiduciary guarantor, she learned that the amount to be guaranteed was the sum of eight million two hundred fifty thousand colones. This fact has been proven not only through the account of Ms. [Name 007], who appeared confident and emphatic in her narrative, but her version has also been corroborated by the testimony of Ms. [Name 011], who not only repeated what the complainant said, but also described her own feeling of being deceived. The defrauding conduct of the investigated party to the detriment of Ms. [Name 007] is regrettable; he not only obtained the fiduciary guarantee through deceit regarding the amount of the credit operation to be guaranteed, but also, in the year two thousand seventeen, he breached the duty of honesty and responsibility by failing to pay the monthly installments of seventy-two thousand seven hundred twenty-one colones and fifty-three céntimos. This situation caused the creditor entity to deduct the unpaid monthly installments from the salary of Ms. [Name 007]. This fact has been acknowledged by the defendant, who argued that his wife's health issues during the period from February to August of the year two thousand seventeen caused an impact on the family economy, since he incurred expenses for medications, private care, transportation, disability leave deductions, and hiring personnel to assist with domestic chores, in addition to attending to the family mortgage that he must pay from his salary. While it is true that the accused provides his wife's discharge summary (epicrisis) to demonstrate the health impairment, it is also true that it was issued by the emergency service of the Hospital México of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social) (image 51-52), documentary evidence that is insufficient to credit the defense argument regarding the expenses for private medical care, transportation, disability leave, and hiring personnel to perform domestic chores. This disciplinary authority does not ignore the strong investment generated by private medical and pharmacy expenses; however, the mere demonstration of a health impairment, per se, does not confirm the expenditures for these items, much less that they caused the economic detriment invoked by the investigated party. Acquiring a credit obligation requires sound and responsible planning, so that in the eventuality of facing a deterioration of assets, the impact on the economy is not invasive, much less affects credibility and trust before third parties, since as a member of the judicial civil service, it behooves him to take the management of personal finances seriously. This disciplinary authority has proceeded to examine the merit of the case file, finding it completely devoid of proof of the impact on the family economy; thus, the argument presented by the accused lacks sufficient evidentiary support to justify the failure to pay the monthly installments. It should be remembered that acquiring a credit obligation stems from a responsible act, as a consequence of thorough planning based on an orderly and responsible financial budget. Now, regarding the installments deducted from the complainant's salary, the accused states that he has proceeded to pay the deducted monthly amounts to the complainant. Far from justifying the reprehensible conduct, this is suitable to demonstrate a careless, irresponsible, and negligent behavior by the accused regarding his duties as the principal debtor with COOPESERVIDORES, to the point that the fiduciary guarantee had to be used to cover the non-payment of two overdue installments for the months of April, August, and December, all in the year two thousand eighteen. The very documentary evidence provided by the accused demonstrates a forced and late fulfillment of the credit debt, without neglecting the fact that the various payment receipts to different financial entities, contributed by the defendant, demonstrate greater indebtedness relative to income sources, and consequently causes an unjustified breach in the payment of the accused's credit operations, a situation which, as noted above, corroborates irresponsible management far from a planned and sound budget, thus proving the accusatory hypothesis. Regarding the credit operation processed with the entity CAPREDE, the complainant states that in June of the year two thousand sixteen, the investigated party contacted her again, arguing that he was processing a mortgage loan on his dwelling house with the entity CAPREDE, for the purpose of a debt consolidation (refundición de créditos), which would include the credit with the entity COOPESERVIDORES in which she was listed as a surety. He subsequently contacted Ms. [Name 007] again, claiming that the property documents were not ready for submission and therefore he needed her to appear as a fiduciary guarantor for only one or two weeks, while the qualification of the property to be mortgaged was presented to formalize said real guarantee (garantía real), and once the mortgage loan for the sum of twenty-three million colones was formalized, she would be excluded from the surety bond constituted with the entity CAPREDE and with COOPESERVIDORES. However, after a period of fifteen days, Ms. [Name 007] asked the accused about the substitution of the mortgage bond, receiving the reply that everything would be sorted out and it was a matter of time. However, in July of the year two thousand sixteen, Ms. [Name 007] decided to appear at CAPREDE, at which time she learned that in file number [Value 006], there was no change of guarantee nor had it been considered, and she also learned that the credit operation with COOPESERVIDORES had not been included in the debt consolidation plan presented to CAPREDE. On this matter, the accused affirms that the guarantee was requested based on the friendship and trust that had existed for many years with the complainant, without her being deceived or induced into error. He alleges that the operation with CAPREDE for the balance of twenty-one million six hundred seventeen thousand seven hundred fifty-four colones is completely up to date and, furthermore, that he acquired this mortgage loan with the intention of cancelling the contracted operation; however, the account executive, Mr. [Name 010], did not consider it appropriate, since the priority was to cancel other obligations acquired with other companies with higher interest rates, in order to obtain greater liquidity. He maintains that he transparently and without any deceit told Ms. [Name 007] that the loan with COOPESERVIDORES could not be cancelled. Upon examining the case file, it is observed that a certification from the entity CAPREDE indeed appears in the file, from which the condition of Ms. [Name 007] as fiduciary guarantor for the credit operation in the amount of twenty-three million thirty-five thousand colones, under the special debt consolidation plan, can be inferred (image 72). Now, the accused reaffirmed her complaint in the evidentiary hearing, and regarding the conditions of the guarantee, deponent [Name 011] stated that the complainant was very happy because the accused told her that he was going to settle the loan with COOPESERVIDORES, but, due to an error in the registry studies, he asked Ms. [Name 007] and a fellow judge for a temporary surety bond while the papers were being processed. Afterwards, she was very distressed and sad because she realized it was not a temporary surety, but for much longer. She adds that the events occurred around mid-year two thousand sixteen, a date she remembers well because she was moving to the collections unit and they had to leave the office up to date. Continuing with the study of the documentary evidence, the certification issued by CAPREDE corroborates the deponent's account regarding her condition as fiduciary guarantor and that of Ms. [Name 014], who at that time was part of the judiciary. Likewise, the defendant acknowledges that the credit with COOPESERVIDORES was not part of the debt consolidation plan, due to the advice of the account executive. Article 298 of the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública) states: "1.- The means of proof may be all those permitted by public law, even if they are not admissible under common law. 2.- Unless otherwise provided, evidence shall be assessed in accordance with the rules of sound criticism (sana crítica)." Sound criticism is conceived as the exercise of assessing the results of evidence, which allows the operator to discern the true from the false, by applying logic, science, and experience, under the exercise of prudence and objectivity in direct relation to a specific matter. In short, they are the rules of correct human understanding, on an average level, without the excessive rigor of statutory evidence (prueba tasada) or the uncertainty of free conviction (libre convicción). Under this concept, this authority finds the testimony of Ms. [Name 011] credible, which is not limited to replicating the narrative of Ms. [Name 007]; she also describes the state of distress and sadness of the complainant upon learning that it was not a temporary surety bond and also that she did not understand the credit obligation acquired with COOPESERVIDORES, in which she was listed as a surety. In addition to the above, the complainant's consent to guarantee the credit obligation for the amount of twenty-three million is understandable, under the promise of a temporary guarantee, in addition to the commitment to cancel the credit acquired with the entity COOPESERVIDORES and consequently be released from her condition as surety. In accordance with the facts described in the accusatory pleading, it is necessary to turn to the provisions of Article 49, subsection c) of the Judicial Service Statute (Estatuto de Servicio Judicial), which provides: "In addition to the specific duties established by the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch, judicial employees shall have the following: c) Observe dignity in the performance of their duties and in their private life." In view of the provisions of the cited regulation, judicial personnel must observe honest, responsible, and upright conduct. This authority emphasizes that the defendant has based his defense on obtaining a new loan based on the pension fund through ANEJUD; however, the case file is devoid of elements of conviction that conclusively corroborate the will to seek a sound and responsible means to release the complainant from the fiduciary guarantees with the entities COOPESERVIDORES and CAPREDE. The same reasoning applies to the argument regarding the sale of properties to make the payment of said obligations; however, the case file is devoid of proof of the efforts to sell the properties, a circumstance that reveals that the defendant effectively distorts the factual events with the purpose of obtaining an advantage for his own benefit, in total disregard for the economic consequences that could result for third parties who at one time offered him support. Also, it is possible to corroborate a conduct prone to over-indebtedness in an irresponsible and disorderly manner, without denoting the intention of releasing the complainant from the condition of surety for the contracted obligations. Another aspect that must be mentioned by this disciplinary body concerns the threatening attitude on the part of the defendant when the complainant informed him of her decision to file a complaint with the Judicial Inspection (Inspección Judicial). The defendant asserts that he has never uttered any threat to Ms. [Name 007]; he argues that he has treated her with utmost respect and has always been in contact with her to explain the economic solutions to try to resolve the situation. In order to verify the threatening comments, the complainant provided screenshots of messages through the WhatsApp platform, from which comments aimed at intimidating, bullying, or threatening Ms. [Name 007] can be observed, with the purpose of discouraging her from filing the complaint with this disciplinary instance. In this regard, it is observed: "Como dice eso. Si me echan la embargan a usted. Nos hundimos los dos" (...) "Le cae Caprede. No es amenaza. Es la lógica. Esta semana pongo al día Coopeservidores." In the first place, it must be noted that the defendant has not objected to the legitimacy of the messages or the authorship of the content; for this reason, this authority finds no reason to disqualify the evidentiary material provided. Having expressed the above, it is clear to this disciplinary authority that the accused intended once again to distort the factual framework of the situation affecting the accused, seeking to free himself from his disciplinary responsibility, under the premise that in the event of a revocation of his appointment, he would have to assume the amount of the loan and thus they would both sink ("nos hundiríamos los dos"). The attitude assumed by the defendant in intimidating the complainant with the non-payment of credit obligations, with the petty interest of evading his disciplinary responsibility, is extremely reprehensible. In this sense, it must be considered that judiciary personnel must adjust their conduct in accordance with Institutional values and the legal system in order not to compromise the credibility of the judicial civil service. In view of the voluntary subjection to the service of the judiciary, conduct contrary to the principles of honesty, responsibility, loyalty, integrity, and transparency is not expected. The Administration, in its capacity as employer, must ensure the correct performance of the judicial body, especially when it concerns judiciary personnel from whom the public expects upright and irreproachable behavior in strict subjection to the ethical principles of trust, good faith, and responsibility that must distinguish those who represent the judiciary. In accordance with the above, this disciplinary authority considers that the conduct described in the accusatory pleading has been fully proven and, consequently, the accused is subject to the application of the disciplinary regime. As a corollary to the above, the argument presented by the accused does not exclude him from the disciplinary regime; as noted in previous lines, the defendant was aware of the deterioration of his finances and yet chose irresponsible and excessive indebtedness. Finally, regarding the absence of intent or gross negligence, our administrative liability regime distinguishes administrative liability, whose imputation criterion is objective, from the liability of the official or servant, which is subjective—the intent and gross negligence in the official's actions; it is regulated in Article 199.1 of the General Law of Public Administration: "The public servant who has acted with intent or gross negligence in the performance of his duties or on the occasion thereof shall be personally liable to third parties, even if he has only used the means and opportunities that the office provides him." Consequently, in light of the administrative legal system, what is relevant is to determine the concepts of "intent" and "gross negligence." The Administrative Litigation Tribunal, Section V, in Resolution No. 00006-2012 of February 1, 2012, has referred to the subject in the following manner: "the first concept refers to the will and intention in the harmful act, while the second, although it does not refer to a lack of foresight, intention, and will in causing the harm, the harm is produced, but due to negligence, imprudence, and lack of skill. That is, the official could have foreseen or avoided the harm and did not do so." In other words, in the case of misconduct attributed to an official, the seriousness thereof is a relevant aspect for the purpose of being able to impute liability to the servant. A contrary interpretation would mean that the servant would not be personally liable, since the conduct must be intentional or negligent. The same regulation in its subsections 2, 3, and 4 clarifies the assumptions under which those cases would apply; thus, it indicates that an official who issues manifestly illegal acts acts with gross negligence, as does the one who obeys them. "For the existence of subjective liability, the concurrence of harm, intent or negligence on the part of the author of the harmful act, and the causal relationship between the conduct that produces it and the harm is required; taking into account that the latter must be proven and that the negligence that will serve as an imputation criterion must be gross. As indicated, the determination of the intent or gross negligence of the servant(s) is fundamental for the attribution of subjective liability." (Administrative Litigation Tribunal, Section V, Ibidem). In the present case, as declared by the complainant and corroborated by the testimony of Ms. [Name 011], it is evidenced that the accused has acted with deceit and thereby obtained an advantage for his benefit, defrauding the trust of the complainant. In this sense, it has been possible to demonstrate the accusatory hypothesis described in the opening order concerning improper conduct that contravenes the duties to observe dignity, decorum, honesty, and rectitude in his private life, and consequently, he is subject to the application of the disciplinary regime. Regarding the defendant's thesis of a new vision of the Judicial Branch, with the aim of referring the present matter to the Restorative Justice Program (Programa de Justicia Restaurativa), requested in a brief dated September ninth of this year. It is considered appropriate to note, according to the provisions of Article 28 of the Regulation of the Restorative Justice Program (Reglamento del Programa de Justicia Restaurativa), it establishes a maximum period of three months in process for the case to be referred to said program, from the issuance of the Statement of Charges (Traslado de Cargos). In the case now before us, the opening order (auto de apertura) was issued at ten hours and fifty-nine minutes on September twenty-sixth of the year two thousand nineteen; as can be observed, by the date of the defendant's request, the process has generously exceeded the period established in the cited Regulation.

Consequently, the action brought by the accused is not admissible.

V.- LEGAL CLASSIFICATION AND SANCTION: THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY AND REASONABLENESS IN THE SANCTION TO BE IMPOSED: In consideration of the principles of proportionality and reasonableness, scholars such as Alfonso Chacón Mata have noted regarding proportionality: "… disciplinary administrative law must be nourished by the guarantees inherent to due process and for this reason, before imposing a sanction, it must pass through the screening of first-order constitutional guarantees that respect the rights to be heard: information and defense as main axes. The sanctioning nature stems from the need to maintain a fair balance between authority and liberty: pillars of democratic coexistence within a Rule of Law …" (Revista de Servicio Civil, Dirección General de Servicio Civil. Ministerio de la Presidencia de Costa Rica, No 20-21, July 2007, Naturaleza y Fines del Derecho Disciplinario, Chacón Mata, Alfonso). With respect to reasonableness, Article XXIII of Session 28-09 of the Consejo Superior of March twenty-fourth, two thousand nine, on the subject indicated: "…Nevertheless, the principles of proportionality and reasonableness of the sanction must be brought up, for which it is necessary to consider ruling No. 8858-98 of December 15, 1998, from the Sala Constitucional, where the following is stated: ‘…An act limiting rights is reasonable when it meets a triple condition: it must be necessary, suitable, and proportional. The necessity of a measure makes direct reference to the existence of a factual basis that makes it essential to protect some good or set of goods of the community - or of a specific group - through the adoption of a differentiation measure. That is, if said action is not carried out, important public interests will be harmed. If the limitation is not necessary, it also cannot be considered reasonable, and therefore constitutionally valid. Suitability, for its part, involves a judgment as to whether the type of restriction to be adopted fulfills the purpose of satisfying the detected need. The unsuitability of the measure would indicate that other mechanisms may exist that better solve the existing need, some of which could fulfill the proposed purpose without restricting the enjoyment of the right in question. For its part, proportionality refers us to a necessary comparative judgment between the purpose pursued by the act and the type of restriction imposed or intended to be imposed, such that the limitation is not of an entity markedly greater than the benefit intended to be obtained for the benefit of the community. Of the last two elements, it could be said that the first is based on a qualitative judgment, while the second starts from a quantitative comparison of the two objects analyzed…’. In consideration of the foregoing, the demonstrated conduct is classified as grave in the terms indicated by numeral 192 subsection 9) of the Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial; the accused has engaged in conduct far from that expected of judicial personnel; it is highly reprehensible to resort to deceit for the purpose of obtaining a guarantee (garantía fiduciaria); similarly, the intimidating attitude carried out through messaging on the WhatsApp platform against the complainant is censurable, with the sole purpose of evading disciplinary responsibility. An attitude that weakens the credibility of the citizenry in judicial personnel, from whom they expect transparent, upright, honest, responsible conduct aligned with the principle of good faith. Irremediably, the gravity of the demonstrated facts does not merit the application of the least sanction provided for by numeral 195 last paragraph; it is extremely reprehensible to resort to deceit for the purpose of obtaining a benefit for one's own advantage, conduct that has been observed throughout this process, attempting to show that one is dealing with a solution to the situation the complainant faces, without providing the slightest element of support, thus defrauding the complainant's trust. In light of the foregoing, [Name 001], at the time of the facts, Judge of the Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo, is hereby imposed the sanction of ONE MONTH OF SUSPENSION FROM THE POSITION WITHOUT PAY; the motivation for the imposition of this sanction rests on a defrauding action for the purpose of obtaining a guarantee (garantía fiduciaria) through deceit, on the first occasion in a credit operation for an amount greater than that reported to Ms. [Name 007], with the entity COOPERSERVIDORES, and on the second occasion before CAPREDE, under the promise of a loan for debt refinancing (crédito por refundición de deudas) in which the operation contracted with the entity COOPESERVIDORES would be included, in addition to the commitment of a temporary guarantee (garantía temporal), all of the foregoing taking advantage of years of close friendship, despite having full knowledge of the weakening of his economic situation and still deciding to contract a new credit obligation for a significant amount, securing the guarantee (garantía fiduciaria) under the promise of a temporary guarantee (garantía temporal) in a loan for debt refinancing (crédito por refundición de deudas) that included the obligation with the entity COOPESERVIDORES. The agreed measure is based on the gravity of the infractions for which the accused was found responsible, weighed against the purposes of the disciplinary process, which seeks to assign sanctions aimed at suppressing conduct such as that noted, such that the now-agreed sanction becomes the only possible sanctioning measure to apply given the specific circumstances set forth throughout this resolution. The sanctioned party is informed that, in accordance with the provisions of articles 66 subsection 5 and 209 ibidem, they have the right to appeal this ruling before the Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial, within three days; prior to referral to the Consejo Superior, the sanctioned party has the right to petition the Comisión de Relaciones Laborales. The Presidencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia is requested to inform this Tribunal and the Departamento de Gestión Humana of the dates on which the administrative act issued herein will be executed, the foregoing in accordance with the stipulations of numeral 228 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública.

POR TANTO

In accordance with the reasoning set forth, numerals 174, 192 subsection 9, 195, 208 and 209 of the Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, in correlation with numeral 49 subsection c) of the Estatuto de Servicio Judicial. The complaint is declared with merit, for IMPROPER CONDUCT THAT CONTRAVENES THE DUTIES TO OBSERVE DIGNITY, DECORUM, HONESTY, AND RECTITUDE IN ONE'S PRIVATE LIFE. The infraction is classified as grave and the sanction of ONE MONTH OF SUSPENSION FROM THE POSITION WITHOUT PAY is imposed on Mr. [Name 001], in his capacity as Judge 4 of the Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda of the Segundo Circuito Judicial. The sanctioned party is informed that, in accordance with the provisions of articles 66 subsection 5 and 209 ibidem, they have the right to appeal this ruling before the Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial, within three days; prior to referral to the Consejo Superior, the sanctioned party has the right to petition the Comisión de Relaciones Laborales. The Presidencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia is requested to inform this Tribunal and the Departamento de Gestión Humana of the dates on which the administrative act issued herein will be executed, the foregoing in accordance with the stipulations of numeral 228 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública. NOTIFY.- Estrellita Orellana Guevara, José Francisco López Chaverri, Hugo Hernández Alfaro.

Inspectors General_.

| <div align="justify">![graphic]( O.I.J. Building First Floor Telephones: 2295-3729 or 2295-3730 or 2295-4338. Fax: 2257-5592. Email: [email protected]</sub></span></span></p> </div> <div align="left"><span style="color: #010101; font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">_&nbsp;</span></span></div>

VOTO N° 2962-2020 TRIBUNAL DE LA INSPECCIÓN JUDICIAL. San José, al ser las diez horas cincuenta y siete minutos del dieciséis de setiembre de dos mil veinte.- Proceso disciplinario tramitado bajo el expediente número 19-003305-0031-IJ Proceso seguido contra [Nombre 001], mayor cédula de identidad número [Valor 001], para el momento de los hechos, en su condición de Juez 4 del Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda del Segundo Circuito Judicial, sumaria disciplinaria iniciada a instancia de la señora [Nombre 007] mayor, cédula número [Valor 005] . Interviene en este procedimiento el licenciado Villarreal Álvarez, en su condición de Inspector Judicial Instructor.

RESULTANDO

I.- Mediante resolución de las diez horas y cincuenta y nueve minutos del veintiséis de setiembre del año dos mil diecinueve, se concedió audiencia al encausado [Nombre 001], Juez 4 del Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda del Segundo Circuito Judicial, para que se manifiest e respecto a los siguientes cargos: “1. Que usted [Nombre 001] , se encuentra nombrado en propiedad en el puesto de Juez de la República, por lo que su persona debe observar los deberes de decoro, dignidad, honestidad y honor, tanto en el desempeño de su cargo como en su vida privada, tal y como lo dispone los artículos 49, inciso 3 del Estatuto del Servicio Judicial, siendo que el citado cargo le demanda constituirse en un ejemplo para la sociedad y su comportamiento debe estar acorde con las normas jurídicas, morales y sociales que le imponen una conducta correcta y cristalina. 2. Que presuntamente usted [Nombre 001], omitió su deber de observar en su vida privada los deberes indicados en el hecho anterior, toda vez que sin precisar fecha exacta, pero para el mes de agosto de dos mil diecinueve, usted [Nombre 001], solicitó colaboración a la señora [Nombre 007] para que esta última se constituyera como garante fiduciaria de un crédito a su nombre en COOPESERVIDORES, por la suma de cinco millones de colones exactos. 3. Que al momento de formalizar dicho crédito en fecha trece de agosto de dos mil doce, mediante la operación número 1012-303-183877 y encontrándose en las oficinas de dicha cooperativa, la señora [Nombre 007] se percató que usted [Nombre 001] había solicitado un monto mayor al indicado, siendo este por la suma de ocho millones ochocientos cincuenta mil colones exactos, por lo que la señora [Nombre 007] al consultarle a su persona por la diferencia entre ambos montos, usted le indicó que efectivamente era mayor, pero que no se preocupara porque usted le haría frente a la deuda. 4. Que sin precisar fecha exacta, pero en el mes de junio de dos mil dieciséis, usted [Nombre 001], nuevamente contactó a la señora [Nombre 007], para decirle que estaba tramitando un crédito con garantía hipotecaria del bien inmueble en el que se encuentra su casa de habitación, con la entidad CAPREDE y con la finalidad de refundir deudas, indicándole que en dicha operación de crédito su persona incluir ía el pago de la deuda con COOPESERVIDORES, señalada en el hecho anterior y donde la señora [Nombre 007] figuraba como fiadora. 5. Que sin precisar fecha exacta, pero en el mes de junio de dos mil dieciséis, usted [Nombre 001] y en relación con el nuevo crédito que estaba gestionando ante CAPREDE, le indicó a la señora [Nombre 007] que los documentos del inmueble a hipotecar aún no se encontraban listos para su presentación, por lo que le solicitó a dicha señora que figurara como fiadora, pero solo por una o dos semanas, mientras se presentaba la certificación del inmueble a hipotecar para formalizar dicha garantía real, de modo que dentro de dicho plazo se excluiría a la señora [Nombre 007] tanto de la fianza ante CAPREDE como en COOPESERVIDORES, siendo que para formular dicho pedido, su persona le manifestó a la señora [Nombre 007] la urgencia porque CAPREDE le girara la suma de veintitrés millones de colones, monto que le fue girado a su persona el día treinta de junio de dos mil diecis éis, al mismo tiempo que le prometió a la señora [Nombre 007] que una vez formalizada la garantía hipotecaria, la fianza de dicha señora quedaría excluida de la operación de crédito. 6. Que una vez transcurrido el plazo de quince días que usted [Nombre 001] le prometió a la señora [Nombre 007] , cuando esta última le consultó a su persona acerca de la sustitución de la fianza por la hipoteca, usted le respondió que todo se iba a arreglar y que era cosa de dar tiempo. 7. Que en razón de que usted [Nombre 001] no cumplió con lo prometido, en relación con la sustitución de la fianza de la señora [Nombre 007] por la hipoteca, sin precisar fecha exacta pero durante el mes de julio de dos mil dieciséis, la señora [Nombre 007] se apersonó ante CAPREDE y se percató a través del expediente del crédito número [Valor 006] , el cual vence hasta el treinta de julio de dos mil diecinueve, que fue engañada por usted [Nombre 001],

pues no existía ni se había considerado el cambio de la garantía que usted le había prometido y además, en ese momento la se ñora [Nombre 007] se percató que la cancelación de la deuda con COOPESERVIDORES, en el que figuraba la señora [Nombre 007] como fiadora, no constaba en el plan de refundición de deudas presentado por su persona ante CAPREDE, por lo que la señora [Nombre 007] se contactó con su persona y usted admitió que la había engañado, argumentando que estaba pronto a resolver dicha situación. 8. Que usted [Nombre 001], de manera presuntamente injustificada, a partir del mes de diciembre del año dos mil diecisiete, incumplió con los pagos correspondientes a la operación de crédito con la cooperativa COOPESERVIDORES, lo cual ocasionó que a partir de dicho mes, se empezaran a reflejar en la coletilla salarial de la señora [Nombre 007] , rebajos salariales por la suma de setenta y un mil trescientos cincuenta colones quincenales, situación que se mantuvo hasta el mes de setiembre de dos mil diecinueve. 9. Que en razón de lo anterior, la señora [Nombre 007] le solicitó a usted [Nombre 001], de buena manera, que tramitará ante el Poder Judicial el rebajo quincenal del crédito y la devolución del dinero que le fue rebajado a dicha señora, su persona procedió a cancelar directamente ante COOPESERVIDORES, únicamente los meses de octubre, noviembre y diciembre de dos mil dieciocho. 10. Que para el mes de enero de dos mil diecinueve, usted [Nombre 001], de manera presuntamente injustificada volvió a incumplir su obligación de crédito, lo que provocó que la entidad COOPERSERVIDORES retomara la figura de la activación de fianzas, los rebajos quincenales del salario de la señora [Nombre 007], hasta el mes de agosto de dos mil diecinueve, por un total de dos millones veinticuatro mil trescientos sesenta y tres colones con veintiocho céntimos, de los cuales usted solamente reconoció en favor de la señora [Nombre 007] la suma de setecientos sesenta y seis mil ochenta y dos colones, adeudando su persona un saldo equivalente a la suma un millón doscientos cincuenta y ocho mil doscientos ochenta y un colones con veintiocho céntimos. 11. Que sin precisar fecha exacta, pero desde el mes de enero del año dos mil diecinueve hasta agosto de ese mismo año y ante reiteradas llamadas telefónicas y mensajes de texto por parte de la señora [Nombre 007], solicitándole a usted que resolviera el conflicto, usted [Nombre 001], manifestó no ser viable resolver la situación de incumplimientos de pago, pues su persona no contaba con liquidez y además, aseguró que estaba próximo a recibir una herencia y pago por concepto de albacea provisional, con lo cual procedería a regular su situaci ón financiera. 12. Que sin precisar fecha exacta, pero desde el mes de enero del año dos mil diecinueve hasta agosto de ese mismo año, cuando la señora [Nombre 007] , le manifestó su intención de recurrir a la Inspecci ón Judicial debido a los hechos anteriormente indicados, usted [Nombre 001] le contestó de manera amenazante indicándole que ella no sab ía quién era usted ni con quién se estaba metiendo la señora [Nombre 007] , lo cual generó temor a esta última por el hecho de que su persona pudiera realizarle algún agravio en perjuicio directamente de ella o de su familia.”. (Sic)

II.-El procesado [Nombre 001], fue debidamente notificado del auto de apertura el día primero de octubre del año dos mil diecinueve (acta de notificación a imagen 41 incorporado al expediente virtual el día 02/10/2019), contestó en los términos de su memorial de im ágenes 42-50, libelo incorporado al expediente virtual el día 09/10/2019).

III.- Se dicta la presente resolución dentro de los plazos legales, sin notarse defectos u omisiones capaces de producir nulidad o indefensión.

Redacta la Inspectora General Judicial, Orellana Guevara; y.

CONSIDERANDO

I.- ASPECTOS DE PROCEDIMIENTO: Error Material: En la audiencia probatoria oral y privada, el órgano instructor, solicit ó se tenga como error material la fecha indicada en el hecho segundo del acto de apertura y en adelante se lea “agosto del año dos mil doce”. Se resuelve: El error material se define como aquel equívoco cometido por la persona operadora del derecho, empero, de una lectura integral se aprecia que se trata de un evidente error, toda vez que no modifica en lo sustancial lo resuelto. En el caso que nos ocupa, de una lectura concatenada del hecho segundo y tercero del auto inicial, se aprecia un evidente error en el año indicado. Al respecto obs érvese, el hecho 2 indica: “pero para el mes de agosto del dos mil diecinueve, usted [Nombre 001], solicitó colaboración a la señora [Nombre 007], para que esta última se constituyera como garante fiduciaria de un crédito a su nombre en COOPESERVIDORES ”. El hecho 3, informa: “al momento de formalizar dicho crédito en fecha trece de agosto del año dos mil doce, mediante la operación número 1012-303-183877 y encontrándose en las oficina de dicha cooperativa”. De una correcta lectura se evidencia que se trata de un simple error material en el año consignado, y en ese sentido se corrige el error que hace notar el órgano instructor, siendo lo correcto, “ agosto del año dos mil doce”. Sobre la prueba para mejor resolver: Conforme lo dispone el numeral 204 de la Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, el recaudo de prueba para mejor resolver, puede ser propuesto en el libelo de alegatos conclusivos. El artículo 41.3 del Código Procesal Civil, regula el tema de la prueba complementaria, aludiendo a una potestad discrecional de la que puede echar mano la autoridad jurisdiccional -en este caso administrativa- cuando exista algún punto sometido al litigio del que requiera mayor información o claridad. Como particular condición, es preciso señalar que este tipo de ofrecimiento no puede ser utilizado por las partes para subsanar las omisiones en las que se haya incurrido en relación con los elementos de prueba, que bien pudo haber sido ofrecido en el momento procesal oportuno. Atendiendo a ello, el órgano decisor se encuentra facultado a denegar la gestión formulada sin necesidad de resolución alguna que así lo indique. Al respecto, el tema ha sido abordado en forma reiterada por la Sala Primera de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, en un caso similar, señaló: “… debe recordarse que, la prueba para mejor resolver, por su naturaleza, es una potestad del juzgador, quien decide su conveniencia y necesidad y, en razón de ello, no se encuentra obligado a admitir la ofrecida por las partes. Se trata de una facultad que le permite anexar, en la fase conclusiva, elementos demostrativos relevantes para la correcta decisión del conflicto. Desde este plano, si bien es lícito incorporar -para mejor resolver- probanzas totalmente nuevas, así como aquellas que fueron declaradas inevacuables, nulas, rechazadas por extemporáneas o inadmisibles, o bien relacionadas a hechos que se tuvieron por ciertos ante la rebeldía del accionado -cardinales 331 y 575 del Código Procesal Civil-, ciertamente, la decisión de recabarla corresponde a una valoración discrecional del juez, quien puede prescindir de ella sin necesidad de resolución expresa.” (Res. N° 408-A- S1-2012 de las 14 horas 30 minutos del 03 de abril de 2013). En el presente proceso, s e pretende introducir el testimonio del señor [Nombre 010] , en carácter de prueba para mejor resolver. En relación con esta formulación se debe acotar, durante la audiencia probatoria el encausado manifestó que no le fue posible contactar al deponente, así entonces, la ausencia injustificada del deponente, de ninguna manera puede ser subsanada a través de la prueba para mejor proveer, en esta etapa procesal. El mismo razonamiento resulta de aplicación para la documental presentada junto con el memorial de alegatos conclusivos. Consecuencia de lo dicho, se rechaza el testimonio ofrecido en carácter de mejor resolver, toda vez que tiene como naturaleza subsanar la ausencia injustificada del testigo a la audiencia convocada. Asimismo, se rechaza la documental aportada junto con el memorial de alegatos conclusivos, por tratarse de documental que bien pudo ser aportada durante el proceso de instrucción y ante dicha incuria, no puede ser subsanada por medio de la prueba para mejor proveer.

II.- HECHOS PROBADOS: De importancia para la decisión del presente asunto, se tiene por demostrado los siguientes hechos: a) El investigado [Nombre 001] desempeña el puesto de Juez 4 del Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda del Segundo Circuito Judicial. Registra en su prontuario veintinueve anuales, para la fecha del informe presenta las siguientes sanciones disciplinarias, Amonestación Escrita, con fecha de rige de ocho y nueve de noviembre del año dos mil diecinueve (Reporte de anuales, a imagen 93, incorporado al expediente virtual el día 11/10/2019, y Reporte de Sanciones y Correcciones Disciplinario por Empleado a imagen 167, incorporado al expediente virtual el día 03/09/2020); b) El encausado [Nombre 001], en el mes de agosto del año dos mil doce, le solicitó a la señora [Nombre 007], se constituyera como garante fiduciaria ante la entidad financiera COOPERSERVIDORES, por la suma de cinco millones de colones exactos. No obstante lo anterior, la formalización del crédito se efectuó el día trece de agosto del año dos mil doce, por un monto de ocho millones doscientos cincuenta mil colones, mediante operación número 1012-303-183877 (Véase Estado de Cuenta Consolidado de COOPERSERVIODRES, a imagen 8, incorporado al expediente virtual el día 02/09/2020, y declaración de la deponente [Nombre 011]); c) El encausado [Nombre 001], para el mes de junio del año dos mil dieciséis, nuevamente contact ó a la señora [Nombre 007], para solicitarle figurara como garante fiduciaria por tan solo dos semanas, ante la entidad financiera CAPREDE, período en el cual se tramitaría la garantía hipotecaria para formalizar un crédito por la suma de veintitrés millones de colones, por refundición de deudas, bajo la promesa que el crédito ante la entidad financiera COOPESERVIDORES, en el cual figuraba como garante fiduciaria, sería incluido dentro del préstamo que estaba gestionado por refundición de deudas. Asimismo, una vez formalizada la garantía hipotecaria quedaría excluida como garante fiduciaria ante la entidad financiera de CAPREDE (Véase declaración de [Nombre 011] ); d) El expediente de formalización de crédito número [Valor 006] , seguido por la entidad financiera CAPREDE, no contempla como parte de la formalización, cambio de garantía fiduciaria por garant ía hipotecaria. Tampoco figuraba dentro del plan por refundición de deudas, el crédito adquirido con la entidad COOPESERVIDORES, en el que la señora [Nombre 007], figura como garante fiduciaria (Véase declaración de [Nombre 011] y Estado de cuenta del cliente de CAPREDE, a imagen 12, incorporado al expediente virtual el día 02/09/2020); e) El encausado [Nombre 001] , ha incumplido su obligación de honrar los pagos correspondientes a la operación de crédito con la entidad COOPESERVIDORES. La mora incurrida por parte del investigado, ocasionó que a partir del mes de diciembre del año dos mil diecisiete, la Cooperativa acreedora procediera a efectuar rebajos salariales por la suma de setenta y un mil trescientos cincuenta colones, durante el período comprendido del mes de diciembre del año dos mil diecisiete al mes de setiembre del año dos mil diecinueve (Véase constancia emitida por COOPERSERVIDORES, a imagen 7, incorporado al expediente virtual el día 02/09/2020); f) Durante el período comprendido de enero a agosto del año dos mil diecinueve, volvi ó a incurrir en mora en la obligación de crédito adquirida con la entidad COOPESERVIDORES, reactivara la garantía fiduciaria, efectuando deducciones quincenales al salario de la señora [Nombre 007], por un monto durante el lapso en mención, de dos millones veinticuatro mil trescientos sesenta y tres colones con veintiocho céntimos (Véase constancia salarial de la señora [Nombre 007] a imágenes 9- 11, incorporado al expediente virtual el día 02/09/2020); g) Sin precisar fecha exacta, pero durante el período comprendido entre enero a agosto del año dos mil diecinueve, al conocer que iba a ser denunciado ante este órgano disciplinario, el procesado [Nombre 001] , le refirió a la señora [Nombre 007] , “Como dice eso. Si me echan la embargan a usted. Nos hundimos los dos” (...) “ Le cae Caprede. No es amenaza. Es la lógica. Esta semana pongo al día Coopeservidores”. (Véase mensajería por medio de la plataforma de WhatsApp, a imagen 166, incorporado al expediente virtual el día 15/06/2020) .

III.- HECHOS NO PROBADOS. No se hizo llegar a los autos material probatorio que demuestre a) Que la entidad financiera CAPREDE no autorizara al encausado incluir el crédito de COOPESERVIDORES, en el cual figura como garante fiduciaria la señora [Nombre 007], dentro del plan por refundición de deudas (No se hizo llegar material probatorio de utilidad); b) Que la señora [Nombre 007] se haya negado a ser sustituida como garante fiduciaria de la operación crediticia adquirida con la entidad CAPREDE (No se hizo llegar material probatorio de utilidad); c) Que el endilgado haya incurrido en gastos por atención médica privada y servicio doméstico (No se hizo llegar material probatorio de utilidad); d) Que el procesado esté gestionando un crédito con base en el fondo de pensiones por medio de ANEJUD (No se hizo llegar material probatorio de utilidad); e) Que el investigado esté realizando gestiones de venta de inmuebles (No se hizo llegar material probatorio de utilidad).

IV- SOBRE EL FONDO DEL ASUNTO: La presente sumaria fue instruida a partir de la denuncia formulada el día veintitrés de setiembre del año dos mil diecinueve, por la señora [Nombre 007] , quien hizo de conocimiento de esta instancia disciplinaria, que se había constituido como garante fiduciaria de las operaciones crediticias contraídas por el investigado [Nombre 001], ante la entidad de COOPESERVIDORES y CAPREDE, atendiendo a la información que le fuera suministrada por el procesado y que posteriormente resultó no ser cierta. Una vez analizado dicho comunicado, el órgano instructor designado, mediante resolución de las diez horas y cincuenta y nueve minutos del veintiséis de setiembre del año dos mil diecinueve, aperturó el presente proceso disciplinario. Comunicado al encausado el auto inicial, procedió a dar contestación al requerimiento formulado, argumentando el quebranto de salud de su señora esposa, situación que en su momento afectó la situación económica del hogar. Además refirió que el ejecutivo de ventas de la entidad financiera, el señor [Nombre 010], no le permitió, ni consideró adecuado, incorporar dentro del préstamo por refundición de deudas, el crédito adquirido con COOPESERVIDORES, debido a que lo prioritario era cancelar obligaciones con otras empresas con un mayor interés, que le permitiera una mayor liquidez. Situación que asegura, era de conocimiento de la señora [Nombre 007] , a quien informó de forma transparente y sin engaño, que no se podía cancelar dicho préstamo. En lo tocante a la solicitud por parte de la señora [Nombre 007] sobre la sustituci ón de garantía fiduciaria, asevera, cuando logró contactar a la persona adecuada para que se pusiera en contacto y lograr un arreglo, la señora [Nombre 007] rehusó tener comunicación con dicha persona, situación que generó un resultado negativo; además, procedió a explicarle a la señora quejosa que cancelar ía dichas obligaciones con la venta de unas propiedades que recibió de una herencia. Finalmente arguye que en la actualidad se encuentra gestionando ante ANEJUD un crédito para refundición de deudas, con el cual pretende solucionar el pago de dichas obligaciones. De conformidad con el ordinal 174 de la Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, el régimen disciplinario tiene por objeto asegurar la eficiencia, corrección y decoro de las funciones encomendabas al Poder Judicial y garantizar a la ciudadanía una correcta administración de justicia. En atenci ón a este principio, le corresponde al Poder Judicial en calidad de empleador, determinar el cumplimiento de la gestión asignada al funcionariado judicial, bajo el entendido, que de observarse conducta contraria a los postulados institucionales, se hará necesario la aplicación del régimen disciplinario. En lo concerniente a los deberes de la persona juzgadora, se ha pronunciado el Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda. Sección Cuarta, voto número 33-2013, de las catorce horas con cuarenta y cinco minutos del veintitrés de abril del año dos mil trece. “Correlativo con las anteriores derechos, el servidor público posee una serie de obligaciones de carácter funcionarial, inherentes a los fines públicos buscados con su actividad y que deben orientar siempre su gestión, a fin de no incurrir en una falta personal generadora de responsabilidad disciplinaria. Sin pretender ser exhaustivos, algunos de los deberes propios del régimen de empleo público, son: a) deber de probidad (art. 3 Ley contra la Corrupción y el Enriquecimiento Ilícito en la Administración Pública), b) deber de cumplimiento de los principios del servicio público - continuidad, eficiencia, adaptación al cambio en el régimen legal e igualdad de trato- (art. 4 Ley General de la Administración Pública), c) deber de cautelar un adecuado ambiente de control interno (art. 39 de la Ley General de Control Interno) d) deber de proteger el interés superior de los niños y las niñas (art. 4 y 5 del Código de la Niñez y la Adolescencia) e) deber de cumplir el ordenamiento jurídico (art. 13 y concordantes de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, art. 39.a del Estatuto de Servicio Civil), f) deber de dar pronta respuesta e información al usuario (art. 5 y 10 de la Ley de Protección al Ciudadano del Exceso de Requisitos y Trámites Administrativos), g) deber de obediencia (art. 108 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública), h) deber de actuar con eficacia (art. 5 de la Ley de la Administración Financiera y Presupuestos Públicos) i) deber de guardar decoro y de brindar debida atención al usuario (art. 114 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública y art. 39. d) y e) del Estatuto de Servicio Civil) j) deber de responder en caso de haber actuado con dolo o culpa grave (art. 199 y 211 Ley General de la Administración Pública) k) deber de acatar la Constitución Política (art. 11 de dicho cuerpo normativo). Adicionalmente, de manera supletoria, con base en el artículo 9 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública y 51 del indicado Estatuto, le son aplicables a dicha relación de empleo público, las disposiciones propias del Código de Trabajo y demás disposiciones relacionadas con la relación de trabajo, como por empleo la Ley de Hostigamiento Sexual en el Empleo y la Docencia, Ley de Regulación del Fumado, Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para Personas con Discapacidad, entre otras. En este orden de ideas, si bien en materia de empleo público no podemos hablar de una plena integración del ordenamiento jurídico y principios en materia laboral habida cuenta de la existencia de una relación estatutaria y no contractual, (artículo 111 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública), no puede obviarse la existencia de líneas generales de orientación de la relación que son comunes, como por ejemplo, la aplicación del principio de buena fe entre ambas partes, contemplado en el artículo 19 del Código de Trabajo ”. Con la finalidad de dictar un fallo acorde al ordenamiento que regula el proceso disciplinario, se procede a la valoración de los medios probatorios incorporados a esta sumaria disciplinaria. Aunado a lo ya expuesto, en atención a la sujeción especial al servicio con este Poder de la República, permite concluir el sometimiento voluntario al cumplimiento de los deberes funcionales y los valores éticos que debe distinguir al colectivo judicial. En este orden de pensamiento, deriva de la cita de examen, deberes que no deben ser exclusivos de la gestión pública, algunos de ellos resulta de aplicación a la vida privada como resultan ser los deberes de probidad, guardar decoro, responder en caso de haber actuado con dolo o culpa grave, así como la aplicación y del principio de buena fe. Con el propósito de examinar la procedencia de la aplicación del control disciplinario, se procede a la sustanciación del material probatorio aportado a los autos. La falta que se le endilga al investigado reviste de gravedad que ha merecido la instrucción de esta sumaria disciplinaria por parte del órgano instructor, toda vez que no es esperable del personal de la judicatura una conducta en total desprecio a la dignidad, el decoro, la honestidad, la buena fe y rectitud en la vida privada. Se tiene por demostrado no solo porque el encausado no lo refuta, sino además porque de la abundante prueba documental se tiene por demostrado que el encausado para el año dos mil doce, conversó con la señora [Nombre 007] a fin de proponerla como garantía fiduciaria para la consecución de un crédito ante la entidad COOPESERVIDORES. Sobre este hecho, informa la señora quejosa que la solicitud de aquella garantía fiduciaria respondería por una operación crediticia por la suma de cinco millones, empero, en el momento en que se presentó ante la entidad Cooperativa, se enteró de que el monto de la obligación número 1012-3030-183877, era por una cifra mayor, exactamente por el monto de ocho millones doscientos cincuenta mil colones (imagen 8). Partiendo de este escenario fáctico, se hace necesario examinar los elementos de apoyo incorporados a esta sumaria disciplinaria. El procesado en su memorial de contestación, no ha refutado este hecho endilgado, se conformó en procurar dar justificación a la mora incurrida ante dicha entidad financiera. Aunado a lo dicho, la deponente [Nombre 011] refirió que la señora [Nombre 007] le comentó que el encausado le hab ía solicitado una fianza por el monto de cinco millones, pero a la hora de firmar era como unos ocho millones de colones. Afirma la declarante que dicho comentario se lo hizo en el año dos mil doce, como parte de su experiencia como fiadora. Aunado a lo ya expresado, los argumentos expuestos por el encausado carecen de idoneidad para descalificar el testimonio de la señora [Nombre 011], quien expuso su relato de forma espontánea y que además impresiona creíble. Así entonces, se tiene por demostrado que el encausado desatendiendo el deber de honestidad y buena fe, faltó a la verdad en el momento inicial de poner en conocimiento de la señora [Nombre 007] las condiciones del monto total de la deuda y mediante una información poco transparente obtuvo la garantía fiduciaria para con la entidad COOPESERVIDORES, en la operación de crédito número 1012-303-183877, por un monto de ocho millones doscientos cincuenta mil colones. Estima esta autoridad disciplinaria, el argumento defensivo expuesto bajo motivos de salud de su señora esposa así como la afectación de la economía familiar, no resultan atendibles para justificar la falta descrita en la pieza acusatoria. Sobre el tema vale rescatar, desde una óptica jurídica, la garantía personal, consiste en un negocio jurídico en el que se respalda el pago de una obligación crediticia contraída por un tercero ante una entidad financiera. Empero, desde de un entendimiento general, la garantía fiduciaria se sustenta en la confianza del garante, de que la persona deudora será responsable del pago de cada uno de los tractos hasta a cancelar la totalidad de la operación crediticia. En este mismo ámbito de confianza la persona deudora debe informar de forma transparente y honesta las condiciones de la gestión de crédito, a saber, monto exacto, tiempo del pago de la deuda así como el monto de cada uno de los tractos mensuales. De igual forma, en caso de una situación que imposibilite el pago de algunos de los tractos convenidos debe, mediar una comunicación oportuna y veraz con la persona garante del crédito, a fin de evitar que de forma sorpresiva se vea afectado el patrimonio de la persona garante. Al efecto, para el año dos mil doce, el encausado solicitó la garantía fiduciaria de la señora [Nombre 007] sobre una operaci ón crediticia por un monto de cinco millones de colones, con la entidad COOPESERVIDORES, sin embargo, para la fecha trece de agosto del mismo año, en el momento de apersonarse a la entidad a formalizar las diligencias en su condición de garante fiduciaria, se enteró que el monto a garantizar lo era por la suma de ocho millones doscientos cincuenta mil colones, este hecho se ha tenido por demostrado no solo con el relato de la de la señora [Nombre 007], quien se mostró segura y enfática en su relato, además, su versión ha sido corroborada con el testimonio de la señora [Nombre 011] quien no solo se conformó con replicar lo comentado por la señora quejosa, sino además, relató la afectación propia del sentimiento de sentirse engañada. Es lamentable el actuar defraudatorio del investigado en perjuicio de la señora [Nombre 007] , quien no solo obtuvo la garantía fiduciaria mediante engaño en cuanto al monto de la operación crediticia a garantizar, sino además, para el año dos mil diecisiete, falt ó al deber de honestidad y responsabilidad de cumplir con el pago de los tractos mensuales por la suma de setenta y dos mil setecientos veintiún colones con cincuenta y tres céntimos. Situación que generó, que la entidad acreedora se recurriera a deducir las cuotas mensuales insolutas del monto salarial de la señora [Nombre 007]. Este hecho ha sido reconocido por el procesado, argumentado una afectación de salud de su señora esposa durante el per íodo comprendido entre el mes de febrero a agosto del año dos mil diecisiete, situación que provocó afectación a la economía familiar, toda vez que incurrió en gastos en medicamentos, atención privada, transporte, rebajos de incapacidades y contratación de personal que colabore con las labores domésticas, además de atender la hipoteca familiar que debe cancelar de su salario. Si bien es lo cierto, el encausado aporta epicrisis de su señora esposa, con la finalidad de demostrar el quebranto de salud, también lo es, que fue expedida por el servicio de emergencia del Hospital México de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social (imagen 51-52), documental que resulta insuficiente para acreditar la argumentación defensiva, con respecto a los gastos de atención médica privada, transporte, incapacidades y contratación de personal para efectuar las labores domésticas. Esta autoridad disciplinaria, no desconoce la fuerte inversión que genera los gastos de médicos y farmacia privada, no obstante lo expresado, la sola demostración de un quebranto en la salud, per se, no confirma las erogaciones por estos conceptos y menos aún que hayan generado el detrimento económico invocado por el investigado. La adquisición de una obligación crediticia exige una planeación sana y responsable, de modo que en el eventual caso que se deba enfrentar un desmejoramiento del patrimonio, el impacto en la economía no sea invasivo y menos aún afecte la credibilidad y confianza ante terceros, pues como parte del funcionariado judicial, le atañe asumir con seriedad la administración de las finanzas personales. Esta autoridad disciplinaria, ha procedido al examen del mérito de los autos, encontrándolos totalmente ayunos en demostrar la afectación a la economía familiar, así entonces, el argumento expuesto por el encausado carece de respaldo probatorio, que resulte suficiente para justificar el incumplimiento del pago de los tractos mensuales. Cabe recordar, la adquisición de una obligación crediticia deviene de un acto responsable, como consecuencia de una planeación concienzuda, basada en un ordenado y responsable presupuesto de la finanzas. Pues bien, en lo tocante a las tractos deducidos al importe salarial de la señora quejosa, refiere el encausado que ha procedido a efectuar el pago de las mensualidades deducidas a la señora quejosa. Lejos de justificar la conducta reprochada, resulta idónea para demostrar un comportamiento despreocupado, irresponsable y negligente del encausado en cuanto a sus deberes como deudor principal ante COOPESERVIDORES, al punto, que debió recurrir a la garant ía fiduciaria para solventar el incumplimiento de dos tractos atrasados para los meses de abril, agosto y diciembre, todas las fechas del año dos mil dieciocho. La misma documental aportada por el encausado, demuestra un cumplimiento obligado y tardío de la deuda crediticia, sin dejar de lado que los diferentes comprobantes de pago a diversas entidades financieras, aportados por el procesado, demuestran un mayor endeudamiento a las fuentes de ingresos, y de forma consecuente provoca un incumplimiento injustificado en el pago de las operaciones de crédito del encausado, situaci ón que como se apuntaba renglones anteriores, corrobora una administración irresponsable alejada de un presupuesto planificado y sano, demostrándose de esta forma la hipótesis acusatoria. En lo tocante a la operación crediticia diligenciada ante la entidad CAPREDE, asegura la señora quejosa, para el mes de junio del año dos mil dieciséis, el investigado nuevamente la contacta, argumentado que tramitaría un crédito hipotecario, sobre su casa de habitación con la entidad de CAPRERDE, con la finalidad de una refundición de créditos, en el cual incluiría el crédito con la entidad COOPESERVIDORES, en la cual figuraba como fiadora. Posteriormente se volvió a comunicar con la señora [Nombre 007], aduciendo que los documentos del inmueble no se encontraban listos para su presentación y por ello necesitaba que figurara como garantía fiduciaria solo por una o dos semanas, mientras se presentaba la calificación del inmueble a hipotecar para formalizar dicha garantía real, y una vez formalizado el crédito hipotecario por la suma de veintitrés millones de colones, sería excluida de la fianza constituida para con la entidad de CAPREDE y de COOPESERVIDORES. Sin embargo, transcurrido un plazo de quince días la señora [Nombre 007] le consultó al encausado sobre la sustitución de la fianza hipotecaria, recibiendo por respuesta que todo se iba a arreglar y era de cosa de tiempo. Sin embargo, para el mes de julio del año dos mil dieciséis, la señora [Nombre 007] decide apersonarse a CAPREDE, momento en que se entera que en el expediente número [Valor 006], no existía, ni se había considerado el cambio de garantía, y además se enteró que la operación crediticia con COOPESERVIDORES, no había sido incluida dentro del plan de refundición de deudas, presentado ante CAPREDE. Sobre el particular el encausado afirma que la garantía fue solicitada partiendo de la amistad y confianza que mediaba desde hace muchos años con la señora quejosa, sin que fuera engañada o inducida a error. Aduce que la operación ante CAPREDE por el saldo de veintiún millones seiscientos diecisiete mil setecientos cincuenta y cuatro colones, se encuentra totalmente al día y además, dicho préstamo hipotecario lo adquirió con la intención de cancelar la operaci ón contraída, sin embargo el ejecutivo de cuenta, el señor [Nombre 010], no lo consideró adecuado, por ser lo prioritario cancelar otras obligaciones adquiridas con otras empresas con un mayor interés, con la finalidad de obtener una mayor liquidez. Sostiene, de forma transparente y sin ningún engaño le refirió a la señora [Nombre 007], que no se pudo cancelar el préstamo con COOPERSERVIDORES. Examinado los autos se aprecia que efectivamente consta en autos certificación de la entidad CAPREDE, de la que se colige la condición de garante fiduciaria de la señora [Nombre 007] , de la operación crediticia por el monto de veintitrés millones treinta y cinco mil colones, bajo el plan especial de refundición de deudas (imagen 72). Ahora bien, la señora encausada ratificó su denuncia en la audiencia probatoria y sobre las condiciones de la garantía, la deponente [Nombre 011] refirió, que la señora quejosa se encontraba muy alegre porque el encausado le comentó que iba finiquitar el pr éstamo con COOPESERVIDORES, pero, debido a un error en los estudios registrales, le solicitó a la señora [Nombre 007] y a una compañera jueza una fianza temporal entre tanto salían los papeles. Despu és estaba muy angustiada y triste porque se dio cuenta que no era fiadora temporal, sino por mucho más tiempo. Adiciona que los hechos se dieron como a mediados del año dos mil dieciséis, fecha que recuerda bien, porque se iba a pasar a la unidad de cobro y debían dejar la oficina al d ía. Continuando con el estudio de la prueba documental, la constancia emitida por CAPREDE, corrobora el relato de la declarante en lo concerniente a su condición de garante fiduciaria como de la señora [Nombre 014] , quien para aquel momento formaba parte de la judicatura. Asimismo el procesado reconoce que el crédito con COOPERSERVIDORES, no formó parte del plan de refundición de deudas, debido al asesoramiento del ejecutivo de cuentas. Conforme el numeral 298 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, señala: “ 1.- Los medios de prueba podrán ser todos los que estén permitidos por el derecho p úblico, aunque no sean admisibles por el derecho común. 2.- Salvo disposición en contrario, las pruebas serán apreciadas de conformidad con las reglas de la sana crítica”. La sana crítica se ha concebido como el ejercicio de la apreciación de los resultados de las prueba, que permiten a la persona operadora discernir lo verdadero de lo falso, desde la aplicación de la lógica, la ciencia y la experiencia, bajo el ejercicio de lo prudente y lo objetivo en relación directa de un determinado asunto. En suma, son las reglas del correcto entendimiento humano, en un plano medio, sin la excesiva rigurosidad de la prueba tasada, ni la incertidumbre de la libre convicción. Bajo este concepto, a esta autoridad le merece fe el testimonio de la señora [Nombre 011], el cual no se limita a replicar la narrativa de la señora [Nombre 007] , expone además, el estado de angustia y tristeza de la quejosa al conocer que no se trataba de una fianza temporal y tampoco comprendía la obligación crediticia adquirida en COOPESERVIDORES, en la cual figuraba como fiadora. Aunado a lo expuesto, resulta entendible la anuencia de la señora quejosa en garantizar la obligación crediticia por el monto de veintitrés millones, bajo la promesa de una garantía temporal, además del compromiso de cancelar el crédito adquirido con la entidad COOPESERVIDORES y de forma consecuente quedar liberada de su condición de fiadora. Conforme los hechos descritos en la pieza acusatoria, se hace necesario recurrir a lo dispuesto por el numeral 49 inciso c) del Estatuto de Servicio Judicial, dispone: “ Además de los deberes específicos que establece la Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, los servidores judiciales tendrán los siguientes : c) Observar dignidad en el desempeño de su cargo y en su vida privada”. En atención a lo previsto por la normativa citada, el personal judicial debe observar una conducta honesta, responsable y proba. Enfatiza esta autoridad, el procesado ha sustentado su defensa en la suscripción de un nuevo crédito con base en el fondo de pensiones por medio de ANEJUD, sin embargo, los autos son ayunos de elementos de convicción que corrobore de forma concluyente la voluntad de procurar un medio sano y responsable de liberar a la señora quejosa de las garantías fiduciarias ante las entidades COOPESERVIDORES y CAPREDE. El mismo razonamiento merece la argumentación referente a la venta de propiedades para efectuar el pago de dichas obligaciones, sin embargo, los autos son ayunos en demostrar las gestiones de venta de los inmuebles, circunstancia que revela que efectivamente el procesado distorsiona los eventos fácticos, con la finalidad de sacar provecho en su propio beneficio, en total desprecio a las consecuencia económicas que pudiera generarle a terceros que en su momento le brindaron apoyo, así también se logra corroborar, una conducta proclive a un sobre endeudamiento de forma irresponsable y desordenada, sin que denote la intencionalidad de liberar a la señora quejosa de la condici ón de fiadora sobre las obligaciones contraídas. Otro aspecto que debe ser mencionado por parte de este órgano disciplinario, es lo tocante a la actitud amenazante por parte del procesado, en el momento en que la señora quejosa le hizo saber su decisión de formular la denuncia ante la Inspección Judicial. El procesado asegura que nunca ha proferido amenaza alguna a la señora [Nombre 007] , arguye que la ha tratado con sumo respeto y siempre ha estado en contacto con ella para explicarle las soluciones económicas para tratar de resolver la situación. A fin de comprobar los comentarios amenazantes, la señora quejosa aportó capturas de imágenes de la mensajería por medio de la plataforma de WhatsApp, de las que se aprecia comentarios orientados a intimidar, amedrentar o amenazar a la señora [Nombre 007] , con la finalidad de desmotivarla a interponer la denuncia ante esta instancia disciplinaria. Al respecto se aprecia “Como dice eso. Si me echan la embargan a usted. Nos hundimos los dos ” (...) “Le cae Caprede. No es amenaza. Es la lógica. Esta semana pongo al día Coopeservidores ”. En un primer plano se debe apuntar, que el procesado no ha objetado la legitimidad de la mensajería ni la autoría del contenido, en razón de lo anterior esta autoridad no encuentra motivo para descalificar el material probatorio aportado. Expresado lo anterior, es claro para esta autoridad disciplinaria la intencionalidad del encausado en tergiversar nuevamente el marco fáctico de la situación que afecta a la encausada, en procura de liberarse de su responsabilidad disciplinaria, bajo la premisa que en caso de una revocatoria de nombramiento debería asumir el monto del cr édito y de esta forma se hundirían los dos. Resulta sumamente censurable la actitud asumida por el procesado concerniente en intimidar a la señora quejosa, con el no pago de las obligaciones crediticias, con el mezquino interés de evadir su responsabilidad disciplinaria. En este sentido, debe considerarse que el personal de la judicatura debe ajustar su actuar conforme a los valores Institucionales y el ordenamiento jurídico con la finalidad de no comprometer la credibilidad del funcionariado judicial. En atención a la sujeción voluntaria al servicio de la judicatura, no es esperable una conducta contraria a los principios de honestidad, responsabilidad, lealtad, honradez y transparencia. La Administración en su condición de empleador debe velar por el correcto desempeño del conglomerado judicial, máxime cuando se trata de personal de la judicatura de quienes la ciudadanía espera un comportamiento probo e intachable en estrecha sujeción a los principios éticos de confianza buena fe y responsabilidad que debe distinguir a quienes representan la judicatura. Conforme lo expresado considera esta autoridad disciplinaria que la conducta descrita en la pieza acusatoria ha quedado plenamente demostrada y en consecuencia, el encausado se hace acreedor de la aplicación del régimen disciplinario. Corolario de lo expresado, el argumento expuesto por el encausado, no lo excluye del régimen disciplinario, tal y como se acotó en líneas anteriores, el procesado era conocedor del deterioro de su economía y aún así optó por un endeudamiento irresponsable y desmesurado. Finalmente en lo concerniente a la ausencia de dolo o culpa grave, nuestro régimen de responsabilidad administrativa, distingue la responsabilidad administrativa, cuyo criterio de imputación es objetivo y la responsabilidad del funcionario o servidor, es de orden subjetivo, el dolo y la culpa grave en la actuación del funcionario; es regulada en el numeral 199.1 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública: “Será responsable personalmente ante terceros el servidor público que haya actuado con dolo o culpa grave en el desempeño de sus funciones o con ocasión del mismo, aunque sólo haya utilizado los medios y oportunidades que le ofrece el cargo” . En consecuencia, a la luz del ordenamiento jurídico administrativo, lo relevante es determinar los conceptos de “dolo” y “culpa grave”. El Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo Sección V en Resolución Nº 00006 - 2012 del 01 de Febrero del 2012, se ha referido al tema de la siguiente forma: "el primer concepto está referido a la voluntad e intencionalidad en el hecho dañoso, mientras la segunda si bien no alude a la falta de previsión, intención y voluntad en la causación del daño; se produce el mismo, pero por negligencia, imprudencia e impericia. Esto es, el funcionario pudo prever o evitar el daño y no lo hizo". Dicho de otro modo, tratándose de faltas atribuidas a un funcionario, la gravedad de la misma, es un aspecto relevante a efecto de poder imputar responsabilidad al servidor. Una interpretación en contrario, conllevaría a que el servidor no respond iera personalmente, pues la conducta debe ser dolosa o culposa. La misma norma en sus incisos 2,3 y 4, se encarga de aclarar los supuestos ante los que se estaría en esos casos; así, señala que actúa con culpa grave tanto el funcionario que emitiere actos manifiestamente ilegales, como el que los obedeciere. "Para la existencia de una responsabilidad subjetiva, se requiere la concurrencia de un daño, el dolo o culpa por parte del autor del hecho dañoso y la relación de causalidad entre la conducta que lo produce y el daño; teniendo en cuenta que éste último debe ser demostrado y que la culpa que nos va a servir como criterio de imputación, debe ser grave. En raz ón de lo indicado, es fundamental para la atribución de la responsabilidad subjetiva, la determinación del dolo o la culpa grave del o de los servidores". ( Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo Sección V, Ibídem). En el presente caso, conforme lo declarado por la señora quejosa y corroborado con el testimonio de la señora [Nombre 011], queda evidenciado que el encausado ha actuado con engaño y con ello obtuvo un provecho en su beneficio, defraudando la confianza de la señora quejosa. En tal sentido, se ha logrado demostrar la hipótesis acusatoria descrita en el acto de apertura concerniente a una conducta indebida que contraviene los deberes de observar dignidad, decoro, honestidad y rectitud en su vida privada y en consecuencia se hace merecedor de la aplicación del régimen disciplinario. En lo tocante a la tesis del procesado en torno a nueva visión del Poder Judicial con la finalidad de que se remita el presente asunto al programa de Justicia Restaurativa, solicitado en memorial de fecha nueve de setiembre del presente año. Se considera conveniente acotar, conforme lo dispuesto por el numeral 28 del Reglamento del Programa de Justicia Restaurativa, establece un plazo máximo de tres meses en trámite, para ser remitido el proceso al mencionado programa , desde la emisión del Traslado de Cargos. En el caso que ahora nos ocupa, el auto de apertura fue dictado a las diez horas y cincuenta y nueve minutos del veintiséis de setiembre del a ño dos mil diecinueve, como puede observarse para la fecha de la formulación por parte del encausado, el proceso ha superado de forma generosa el plazo dispuesto en el Reglamento de cita. En consecuencia no resulta de recibo la gestión planteada por el encausado.

V.- CALIFICACIÓN LEGAL Y SANCIÓN: EL PRINCIPIO DE PROPORCIONALIDAD Y RAZONABILIDAD EN LA SANCIÓN A IMPONER: En atención a los principios de proporcionalidad y razonabilidad, Doctrinarios como Alfonso Chacón Mata, ha señalado sobre la proporcionalidad: “… el derecho administrativo disciplinario debe nutrirse de las garantías inherentes al debido proceso y por esta razón, antes de imponer una sanción, la misma debe pasar por el tamizaje de las garantías constitucionales de primer orden que respeten los derechos de audiencia: información y defensa como ejes principales. La naturaleza sancionadora deviene de la necesidad de mantener un justo equilibrio entre autoridad y libertad: pilares de la convivencia democrática dentro de un Estado de Derecho …” (Revista de Servicio Civil, Dirección General de Servicio Civil. Ministerio de la Presidencia de Costa Rica, No 20-21, julio 2007, Naturaleza y Fines del Derecho Disciplinario, Chacón Mata, Alfonso). Con respecto a la razonabilidad el Artículo XXIII de la Sesión del Consejo Superior 28-09 del veinticuatro de marzo del dos mil nueve, en cuanto al tema indicó: “…No obstante, debe traerse a colación los principios de proporcionalidad y razonabilidad de la sanción, para lo cual es preciso considerar la sentencia N°8858-98 del 15 de diciembre de 1998, de la Sala Constitucional, donde se señala lo siguiente: “…Un acto limitativo de derechos es razonable cuando cumple con una triple condición: debe ser necesario, idóneo y proporcional. La necesidad de una medida hace directa referencia a la existencia de una base fáctica que haga preciso proteger algún bien o conjunto de bienes de la colectividad - o de un determinado grupo - mediante la adopción de una medida de diferenciación. Es decir, que si dicha actuación no es realizada, importantes intereses públicos van a ser lesionados. Si la limitación no es necesaria, tampoco podrá ser considerada como razonable, y por ende constitucionalmente válida. La idoneidad, por su parte, importa un juicio referente a si el tipo de restricción a ser adoptado cumple o no con la finalidad de satisfacer la necesidad detectada. La inidoneidad de la medida nos indicaría que pueden existir otros mecanismos que en mejor manera solucionen la necesidad existente, pudiendo algunos de ellos cumplir con la finalidad propuesta sin restringir el disfrute del derecho en cuestión. Por su parte, la proporcionalidad nos remite a un juicio de necesaria comparación entre la finalidad perseguida por el acto y el tipo de restricción que se impone o pretende imponer, de manera que la limitación no sea de entidad marcadamente superior al beneficio que con ella se pretende obtener en beneficio de la colectividad. De los dos últimos elementos, podría decirse que el primero se basa en un juicio cualitativo, en cuanto que el segundo parte de una comparación cuantitativa de los dos objetos analizados...”. En atención a lo expuesto, la conducta demostrada, se califica de grave en los términos señalados por el numeral 192 inciso 9) de la Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, el encausado ha incurrido en una conducta alejada a lo esperado por el funcionariado judicial, resulta altamente reprochable recurrir al engaño con el propósito de obtener una garantía fiduciaria, del mismo modo resulta censurable la actitud intimidante efectuada mediante mensajería de la plataforma de WhatsApp, en contra de la señora quejosa con la única finalidad de evadir la responsabilidad disciplinaria. Actitud que debilita la credibilidad de la ciudadanía en el funcionariado judicial, de quien esperan una conducta transparente, proba, honesta, responsable y apegada al principio de buena fe. Irremediablemente, la gravedad de los hechos demostrados, no merece la aplicaci ón de la menor de las sanciones dispuesta por el numeral 195 último párrafo, resulta sumamente reprochable recurrir al engaño con el propósito de obtener un provecho en beneficio propio, conducta que se ha observado a lo largo de este proceso, pretendiendo mostrar que se ocupa de una solución a la situación que enfrenta la señora quejosa, sin aportar el más mínimo elemento de apoyo, defraudando de esta forma la confianza de la señora quejosa. En atención a lo expresado se impone a [Nombre 001] , para el momento de los hechos, Juzgador del Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo, la sanción de UN MES DE SUSPENSIÓN DEL CARGO SIN GOCE DE SALARIO, la motivación para la imposición de esta sanción, reside en una actuación defraudatoria con la finalidad de obtener una garantía fiduciaria por medio de engaño, en la primera ocasión en una operación crediticia por un monto mayor al informado a la señora [Nombre 007] , con la entidad de COOPERSERVIDORES y en la segunda ocasión ante CAPREDE, bajo la promesa de un crédito por refundición de deudas en el cual se incluiría la operación contraída con la entidad COOPESERVIDORES, además del compromiso de una garantía temporal, todo lo anterior aprovechando los años de estrecha amistad, pese a tener pleno conocimiento del debilitamiento de su situación económica y aún así, decidió contraer una nueva obligación crediticia por un monto importante, asegurando la garantía fiduciaria bajo la promesa de una garantía temporal en un crédito por refundición de deudas que comprendía la obligación con la entidad de COOPESERVIDORES. La medida acordada se sustenta en la gravedad de las faltas por las cuales el encausado fue encontrado responsable, sopesadas con los fines del proceso disciplinario, el cual pretende asignar sanciones tendientes a suprimir conductas como las apuntadas, de manera tal que la sanción ahora acordada, deviene en la única medida sancionatoria posible de aplicar atendiendo las particularidades expuestas a lo largo de la presente resolución. Se le hace saber al sancionado que, de conformidad con lo dispuesto en los artículos 66 inciso 5 y 209 ib ídem, tienen derecho a recurrir de este fallo ante el Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial, dentro de tercero día, previo a la remisión al Consejo Superior, tiene derecho el sancionado a gestionar ante la Comisión de Relaciones Laborales . Se solicita a la Presidencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, poner en conocimiento de este Tribunal y del Departamento de Gestión Humana, las fechas en las cuales se procederá a ejecutar el acto administrativo que aquí se dicta, lo anterior en apego a lo estipulado en el numeral 228 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública.

POR TANTO

De conformidad con los razonamientos expuestos, numerales 174, 192 inciso 9 195, 208 y 209 de la Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial , en correlación con el numeral 49 inciso c) del Estatuto de Servicio Judicial. Se declara con lugar la queja, por CONDUCTA INDEBIDA QUE CONTRAVIENE LOS DEBERES DE OBSERVAR DIGNIDAD DECORO, HONESTIDAD Y RECTITUD EN SU VIDA PRIVADA. Se califica la falta de grave y se impone al señor [Nombre 001], en su condición de Juez 4 del Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda del Segundo Circuito Judicial, la sanción de UN MES DE SUSPENSIÓN DEL CARGO SIN GOCE DE SALARIO. Se le hace saber al sancionado que, de conformidad con lo dispuesto en los art ículos 66 inciso 5 y 209 ibídem, tienen derecho a recurrir de este fallo ante el Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial, dentro de tercero día, previo a la remisión al Consejo Superior, tiene derecho el sancionado a gestionar ante la Comisión de Relaciones Laborales . Se solicita a la Presidencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, poner en conocimiento de este Tribunal y del Departamento de Gestión Humana, las fechas en las cuales se procederá a ejecutar el acto administrativo que aquí se dicta, lo anterior en apego a lo estipulado en el numeral 228 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública. NOTIFIQUESE.- Estrellita Orellana Guevara, José Francisco López Chaverri, Hugo Hernández Alfaro. Inspectores Generales.

*WFOR0JSXZTW61* ESTRELLITA ORELLANA GUEVARA - INSPECTOR/A INSTRUCTOR/A *90ZCDY2NAVK61* HUGO HERNANDEZ ALFARO - INSPECTOR/A INSTRUCTOR/A *MSLPLS43PTZK61* JOSE FRANCISCO LÓPEZ CHAVERRI - INSPECTOR/A INSTRUCTOR/A Edificio O.I.J. Primer Piso Teléfonos: 2295-3729 ó 2295-3730 ó 2295-4338. Fax: 2257-5592. Correo electrónico: [email protected]