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

A. On January 1, 2013, the Plaintiff, a company running a building cleaning business, etc., has concluded a cleaning service contract with the US military unit (ammp humphys) stationed in Pyeongtaek-si and provided cleaning services.

B. On January 1, 2013 and January 1, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into an employment contract with A and B with the term of one year, and both A and B performed cleaning work in the military unit not described in the foregoing paragraph (a).

C. On January 1, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a non-fixed-term employment contract with A (64 years of age) and B (55 years of age). On April 23, 2015, the Plaintiff notified A and B of the expiration of the contract that “The contract with the original contractor cannot be maintained after the termination of May 31, 2015,” and accordingly, A and B retired on May 31, 2015.

On June 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a subsidy for employment of the aged aged 60 years or older (the first quarter), and the Defendant paid KRW 7,295,400 to the Plaintiff on June 5, 2015 as a subsidy for employment of the aged aged 60 years or older (the first quarter).

E. On December 1, 2015, the Defendant issued an order to return KRW 7,295,400 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) paid to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff applied for the employment subsidy for the aged aged 60 years or older and received unjust payment, notwithstanding the fact that the Plaintiff was unable to receive the employment subsidy for the aged aged 55 years or older (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion terminated contractual relationship with workers A and B as the contract with the U.S. military unit located in Pyeongtaek-si was concluded between January 1, 2013 and May 31, 2015.

It is the Employment Insurance Act that the plaintiff terminated the employment contract with A and B upon termination of the contract with the original contractor.