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

가. 원고는 자동차정비업을 목적으로 2012. 5. 8. 설립된 회사로, 2015. 11. 18. 한국산업인력공단(이하 ‘공단’이라 한다)과 사이에 ‘공단은 일학습병행 프로그램 운영 및 훈련비용 지원 등을 하고, 원고는 일학습병행제에 참여할 학습근로자를 모집ㆍ채용하여 학습근로자에게 훈련실시 및 근로환경제공 등을 하기’로 하는 일학습병행제 사업 및 훈련실시에 관한 약정을 하고, 2016. 1. 20. 공단으로부터 ‘자동차정비기술자(자동차정비사 L2, 고교수준) 일학습병행제 훈련과정(실시기간 2016. 3. 19. ∽ 2017. 3. 18.)’을 인정받았다.

B. The Plaintiff reported to the GEPS that the Plaintiff’s employee B was selected as a learning worker and conducted the above training from March 19, 2016, and received KRW 11,529,630 in total by claiming subsidies, such as training expenses.

C. On August 16, 2017, the Corporation requested a guidance and inspection to the Defendant on August 16, 2017, that D’s study workers of the Plaintiff Company and the representative director of the Plaintiff Company are two or more different training courses.

Around September 2017, the Defendant confirmed the circumstances suspected of illegal training as a result of the guidance and inspection, and confirmed that “the Plaintiff’s study worker performed the general maintenance work at the time of on-the-spot training, contrary to the description of the training site and the attendance book,” during the process of expanding the investigation into illegal receipt of other daily learning-related parallel training conducted companies.

On February 20, 2018, the Defendant issued a prior notice of administrative disposition and guidance to submit opinions on February 20, 2018, and on March 22, 2018, applied Articles 24, 55, and 56 of the Workers’ Vocational Skills Development Act to the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff was provided with training costs by falsely preparing and submitting a false statement as if it was actually conducted despite the failure to conduct on-site training (OJT)” and “the cancellation of recognition as a motor vehicle maintenance technician (tax L2)”, and the restriction on entrustment of one-year course and recognition.