Law Firm Namsan, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Attorney Kim Tae-hun, Justice Kim Tae-hun and Justice Park Jung-he

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

A. The Plaintiff is a juristic person running bus transport business, and the Plaintiff’s “business owner’s vocational skills development training course for workers belonging to the Plaintiff” is entrusted to the Plaintiff as follows, and received support from the Human Resources Development Service of Korea for totaling KRW 34,988,800 for 781 workers on two occasions.

A person shall be appointed.

B. In the above training course, the Defendant entered B’s employees into Jindo learning and evaluation on behalf of 746 workers who were employed by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant training”). However, on the ground that the Plaintiff applied for subsidization of expenses as if the Plaintiff had completed training in a normal condition, and received training expenses by false or other unlawful means, pursuant to Articles 5(2)1 and 56(2)3 of the former Act on the Development of Workplace Skills of Workers (amended by Act No. 13902, Jan. 27, 2016; hereinafter “the former Act”), Article 22-2(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Vocational Skills Development Act (hereinafter “the Act”), on June 5, 2017, the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to return the instant 33,420,800 won to the Plaintiff, and additionally collected the same amount as the amount of training expenses, and returned the amount of subsidies and additional collection for 360 days and 360 days (hereinafter “the aforementioned disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

A. The plaintiff's assertion

B’s employees, who claimed the use of a computer, only assist the Plaintiff’s employees in the process of using the computer so that they can receive online lectures and evaluations without delay, and there was no fact in lieu of taking lectures and evaluation itself.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) Relevant legal principles

"False or any other fraudulent means" provided for in Articles 55(2) and 56(2) and (3) of the former Development of Vocational Skills means all active and passive acts that a person who is not eligible to receive subsidies generally leads to a person who is not eligible to receive subsidies as if he/she is qualified or who is not correct under social norms to conceal the fact that he/she is not eligible, which may affect the decision-making on subsidization of expenses (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Du1980, Oct. 30, 2014).

Article 20(3) of the former Act on the Development of Vocational Skills, Article 19(3) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Development of Vocational Skills (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27393, Jul. 26, 2016); Article 41(4) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Employment Insurance Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 28160, Jun. 27, 2017); Article 8(1)3 of the former Regulations on Assistance to Vocational Skills Development of Workers (wholly amended by Presidential Decree No. 2015-114, Dec. 31, 2015; hereinafter referred to as the "former Regulations on Assistance") provides that “Any person who has completed the pertinent training course with a master’s degree of at least 60 points for trainees; any person who has completed the training course with a view to at least 80 percent of the learning activity ratio; any person who has been provided with distance training can be provided with a distance training program for at least 10 percent.”

According to this, trainees should learn themselves according to the learning goals, learning plans, etc. presented in the training teaching materials distributed by the remote training institution, and be evaluated as the result of the evaluation of the progress stage, such as learning tasks, and the results of training by linking the training learning management system.If trainees do not normally receive vocational training conducted by the remote training, and thereby fail to meet the standards for completing postal distance training courses, they are provided with subsidies by submitting a false application that trainees would normally receive vocational training and meet the standards for completing postal distance training courses, and they are provided with subsidies by fraudulent or other unjust means.

2) Specific determination

Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 through 40 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the entire pleadings, it may be recognized that the instant trainees were paid the instant training costs by applying for subsidies as if they were engaged in training and completion in a normal manner, even though they did not normally undergo vocational training conducted by mail, and failed to meet the standards for completing distance training courses due to them, and the Plaintiff was paid the instant training costs, and contrary thereto, the statements of evidence Nos. 12 and 13 and the testimony of the witness C are not trusted. Accordingly, the instant disposition is lawful.

A) On January 5, 2018, the internal director D, head E, and head of division, who is the representative of B, conspired with trainees to visit the place of business of transportation business entities without paying training teaching materials and make trainees conduct a proxy lecture and a proxy test by creating a ID by personal information of trainees, and he was indicted (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2018 High Court Decision 201Da8460, 905 decided on April 6, 2018) on the charge of receiving total of KRW 1,78,460,90 from the Republic of Korea by taking advantage of the appearance that the trainees meet the requirements for completing the remote training course by the method of driving a proxy lottery, including the instant criminal case related to the instant criminal case (hereinafter referred to as "related criminal case").

B) During the investigation process of related criminal cases, B sent a document stating that “I will help you do not go beyond an on-site investigation by the Ministry of Employment and Labor. I will refer to the questionnaire prepared by other companies. I will comply with the Ministry of Labor. I will also send a document stating that “I will help you will not go beyond an on-site investigation by the Ministry of Labor.”

C) During the investigation process of the relevant criminal case, B’s officers and employees and part-time trainees created the ID and password of trainees at will, and formally dispatched to a training target institution and sent a few trainees with the OX quiz, etc. However, in fact, B’s employees had access to the trainee’s ID and password and conducted a proxy evaluation at will after they had access to the trainee’s website, and they did not fall under “persons who can undergo remote postal training as prescribed in attached Table 1 of the former Support Regulations.” During the training period, all daily workers employed in B had no eligibility to undergo remote training as prescribed in attached Table 1 of the former Support Regulations. Nevertheless, they conducted additional search training for the trainee of this case.

D) The evaluation score of the instant training is 12.5 points of Jindo 12.5, Jindo 25 points, Jindo 37.5 points, Jindo 450 points, Jindo 50 points, Jindo 62.5 points, Jindo 675 points, Jindo 77.5 points, Jindo 87.5 points, Jindo 810 points, Jindo 8.5 points, and Jindo 12.5 points, regardless of whether the trainee was a trainee. This is the numerical value that cannot be seen if each trainee was actually assessed.

E) As a result of the analysis of IP conducted at the same time, at the same time, at the same time, more than two trainees existed in the same IP. This appears to have appeared in the process of entering the subsequent trainees’ evaluation results by referring to the aforementioned input, referring to a new screen back to the ID system of other trainees without logouts. Of the instant trainees, G released 21 minutes of March 22, 2014 and operated 12:39 minutes at 10:39 minutes on the day, but 10:39 minutes on the training management system, 10 minutes on the average of less than 2.1 hours on the 20th day of the instant training (by 2.29 minutes on February 24, 2014). In addition, among the instant training courses, the average of less than 2.1 hours on the 36th day of the initial training (by 10:25 hours on the average of 21:36 hours on the 36th day of the first training period).

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Lee Jae-chul

Judge Powers Governing Authority

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.