beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.12.20 2018구합54563

원장자격취소처분 등 취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is the president and the infant care teacher, who is the founder and operator of the C Child Care Center, a family childcare center located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter “C Child Care Center”).

B. At around 17:00 on January 18, 2018, the Plaintiff was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million on March 6, 2018 with a fine of KRW 1,00,000 as a crime under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter “instant act”), and the summary order became final and conclusive as it is, on the following grounds: (a) the Plaintiff was issued a summary order of KRW 2,00,000 as a fine of KRW 1,00,00,000 for a crime under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (Assault) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter “instant act”).

C. On September 14, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s qualification for the head of the childcare center and the qualification for childcare teachers under Article 48(1)3 of the Infant Care Act on the ground that the Plaintiff constitutes “the case where the Plaintiff was punished for committing a child abuse-related crime under Article 3 subparag. 7-2 of the Child Welfare Act” and that the Plaintiff’s instant act constitutes “the case where the child abuse-related crime under Article 3 subparag. 7 of the Child Welfare Act was committed” (hereinafter, from November 1, 2018 to April 30, 2019) for six months of the suspension of operation of the childcare center on the ground that the Plaintiff constituted “the case where the child abuse-related crime under Article 3 subparag. 7-2 of

[Grounds for recognition] The entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The “child abuse-related crime” and “child abuse-related crime”, which are the grounds for the Plaintiff’s assertion 1 disposition in this case, are premised on the child abuse under Article 3 subparag. 7 of the Child Welfare Act. The child abuse under Article 3 subparag. 7 of the Child Welfare Act is under Article 17 of the Child Welfare Act.