생계급여 지급거부 처분취소
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.
The reasoning for this case is to be stated by the court of the first instance, which cited the judgment of the court of first instance, is to delete the first instance from the fourth to fifth, while the plaintiff’s argument presented by this court is to be stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for the addition of the judgment of the court of first instance under paragraph (3) below. Thus, this is to be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence
On January 13, 2017, which was before the filing of the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff filed a civil petition with respect to the Defendant to present it, but the Defendant did not answer in violation of Article 15 of the Enforcement Decree of the Civil Petitions Treatment Act. Accordingly, the instant disposition was made by giving the Plaintiff an opportunity to respond in advance. Since the Defendant’s civil petition treatment was erroneous as above, the instant disposition arising therefrom should also be deemed unlawful. 2) The Defendant forced the Plaintiff to participate in the process of creating a job failure without undergoing prior consultation, investigation, and establishment of a self-support plan as stipulated in the National Basic Living Security Act, and thus, the instant disposition was unlawful.
3) Although the Plaintiff was unable to obtain an income exceeding KRW 600,000 per month, the Defendant has a professional occupation (or novel) and did not want to transfer to another position, and thus, the Defendant unilaterally establishes and implements a self-support plan with a content other than participation in the process of employment failure. Nevertheless, the Defendant unilaterally participated in the process of employment failure failure to raise to the Plaintiff. In light of the written evidence No. 3, Article 28 of the National Basic Living Security Act and Article 15 of the Constitution, the Defendant’s administrative act violates Article 3 and Article 28 of the National Basic Living Security Act and Article 15 of the Constitution, and the Defendant took part in the Plaintiff’s civil petition on January 24, 2017 as part of the self-support plan under Article 28 of the National Basic Living Security Act.