어린이집운영정지처분취소등
1. On January 2, 2017, the Defendant’s six-month suspension of the operation of a child care center to the Plaintiff and three-month qualification as the president of a child care center.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On April 27, 2007, the Plaintiff acquired a child care teacher qualification as a child care teacher, and on October 14, 2009, the Plaintiff acquired a child care teacher qualification as the head of the child care center.
In early 2015, the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant childcare center”) opened a “C childcare center,” which is a family childcare center of Mapo-gu Seoul, Mapo-gu, 404 Dong 103, 2015.
The plaintiff performed his duties as the president of the child care center of this case.
B. On April 18, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a civil petition with his parents that D, who is a child care teacher of the instant childcare center, was at the time of birth, and inspected CCTV installed in the instant childcare center. At that time, the Plaintiff confirmed that D and her parents inspected CCTV installed in the instant childcare center, and that D and her head were rashed by drawing up her half of her head or by dividing her head into her face with hand.
Some of their parents filed a complaint with the Plaintiff at the Seoul Mapo Police Station around that time.
C. On May 10, 2016, the Seoul Mapo Police Station notified the Defendant of the fact that “D habitually abused the victimized children with physical and emotional development from March 2, 2016 to April 14, 2016, and the Plaintiff neglected to exercise due care and supervision over D” was recognized and sent to the Defendant as the prosecution’s opinion.
On July 2, 2016, the Defendant requested the Seoul Mapo Police Station to list the crimes in which D violated the Child Welfare Act. On July 6, 2016, Seoul Mapo Police Station received the list of crimes in attached Form 4.
Around November 2016, the Defendant held a hearing with respect to the Plaintiff, and on January 2, 2017, issued a six-month suspension order for the operation of a child care center (hereinafter “instant suspension order”) and three-month suspension order for the head of a child care center (hereinafter “instant suspension order”) on the ground that the Plaintiff committed child abuse by childcare teacher D.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-3 evidence, Eul 1 evidence, pleading.