영유아보육법위반등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal principles 1) The Defendant’s special activity expenses agreed with F and N, a special activity supplier, constitute an appropriately determined actual supply price, and the Defendant does not have a legal or contractual obligation to notify the childcare guardian of the receipt of part of the special activity expenses from the special activity supplier after the fact, and thus, the Defendant was unaware of the guardian or used unlawful means during the process of receiving the special activity expenses.
shall not be deemed to exist.
2) The guardian of infant care is merely paying the amount of the special activity expenses after determining that the amount of the activity expenses is appropriate, and it does not constitute an act of disposal by mistake due to the defendant's act. Thus, there is a relation between the defendant's act and the special activity expenses
subsection (b) of this section.
3) Since a special activity supplier has faithfully performed a special activity regardless of the return of part of the special activity expenses to the defendant, there is no child care guardian who has suffered any property loss.
4) Since the Defendant was only refunded part of the special activity expenses according to the practice of the special activity supplier, there was no intention to commit each of the instant crimes.
5) Since guidelines for guidance on child care programs of the Health and Welfare Council stipulate special activities expenses as necessary expenses of child care centers from 2012 to determine the amount received by the Mayor/Do Governor, punishment for the violation of the Infant Care Act with regard to the portion on which special activities are paid during the period from March 1, 2010 to February 29, 2012, which is before the above guidelines are applied, is retroactively applied to the purport of the above guidelines, and is in violation of the principle of statutory punishment.
6) Pursuant to Article 54-2 of the former Infant Care Act (amended by Act No. 13321, May 18, 2015), the acts before and after August 13, 2013 among the violations of the Infant Care Act are separated.