업무정지처분취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case is as follows: (a) the Plaintiff’s “Plaintiff” of the first instance judgment No. 10 is dismissed as “the Plaintiff,” and (b) the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the part of the reasoning of the judgment, except for addition of the judgment of the Plaintiff’s assertion, which is repeatedly emphasized by this court; and (c) thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the text of Article 420
2. Additional determination
A. At the instant medical care institution (Cmedical care institution) the Plaintiff’s assertion D, while performing the duties of providing support for physical activities and daily life of caregivers as unique duties, D also performed the duties of environmental management and facility management. The working hours are 12 hours per day.
Nevertheless, the Defendant deemed that the Plaintiff unfairly claimed medical care benefit costs in violation of the criteria for placement of human resources and the criteria for addition of additional placement of human resources, on the premise that the work hours of DNA caregivers are excessive to four hours a day, and thus, issued the instant disposition.
Therefore, the instant disposition should be revoked in an unlawful manner.
B. Determination 1) Article 31(2) of the Act on Long-Term Care Insurance for the Aged provides that “a person who intends to be designated as a long-term care institution shall have facilities and human resources necessary for long-term care prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare.” Article 23(2)2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on Long-Term Care Insurance for the Aged shall be provided that “a medical welfare institution prescribed in Article 34 of the Welfare of the Aged Act shall have facilities and human resources prescribed in attached Table 4.” Article 22(1) [Attachment 4] of the former Enforcement Rule of the Welfare of the Aged Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 412, Jun. 30, 2016) provides that one caregiver shall be placed per 2.5 persons admitted to a long-term care institution.” Article 22(1) [Attachment 4] of the former Enforcement Rule of the