장애인고용장려금 환수 및 추가징수등처분취소
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: ① part of the second half of the judgment of the first instance is as follows: ② part of the second half of the second half is as the first half; ② part of the second half of the second half is as the second half; ③ each quarter by the second half of the said 17th half is as the "half half by the second half"; ④ the fifth half is as the "half half by the second half"; ④ the fifth half is as the "half half by the second half"; and the second half is as the reasons for the second half of the judgment of the first instance except for the addition of the contents as stated in the second half by the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance; and therefore, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Details of the judgment added;
A. The Defendant’s filing of an application for additional payment on the premise that the Defendant received the employment incentive by false or other unlawful means, such as a false report, etc., even with this Court, is again exercising the right to claim the payment of the employment incentive on a half-yearly basis, which is a single bond calculated on the basis of the total number of disabled workers. As such, the Defendant’s filing of an application for additional payment also falls under a false or other unlawful manner, and thus, the Defendant’s claim for additional payment ought to run
B. Examining the following circumstances in light of the facts acknowledged by the first instance court and the overall purport of the arguments presented by the first instance court, the extinctive prescription of the right to recover and additionally collect the employment incentive of each of the instant employment incentive from the date of each initial disposition of the employment incentive of each of the instant case where the requirements to exercise the right to recover and additionally collect are satisfied, regardless of whether the Defendant was aware of the falsity of the instant application or whether the Plaintiff applied for additional payment, or whether the Plaintiff applied for the payment of the employment incentive.
As such, the defendant's above assertion is valid.