2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

On January 26, 2005, the Plaintiff acquired the qualifications of class 2 and class 40 child care teachers, and worked as infant care teachers at C childcare centers located in Guri-si B from January 27, 2005, and from March 5, 2010, E childcare centers located in Guri-si D (hereinafter “instant child care centers”).

After that, on November 16, 2012, the Plaintiff acquired the first class child care teacher qualification, and on November 16, 2015, the Plaintiff obtained the first class child care teacher qualification as a “person with child care services, such as child care, for at least three years after obtaining the first class teacher qualification as a child care teacher.”

Meanwhile, from April 5, 2011 to September 2, 2015, the Plaintiff leased the name of the head of the instant childcare center from the F to the head of the instant childcare center, and operated the instant childcare center. On March 2, 2016, the Plaintiff confirmed the above facts and could not be deemed to have performed his/her legitimate duties, and it cannot be deemed to have performed his/her duties as a child care teacher, and thus, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have performed his/her duties as a child care teacher for at least three years. However, on the ground that he/she acquired the Plaintiff’s child care center license by fraud or other improper means, “the Plaintiff’s child care center license was revoked as of March 18, 2016” under Article 48(1)1 of the Infant Care Act as the “disposition.

) After the instant disposition, the Plaintiff’s career certificate issued on April 7, 2016 by the Guri market after the instant disposition indicated that the Plaintiff’s career certificate was revoked on March 18, 2016, and the Plaintiff’s career certificate with less than 40 children’s license. [The Plaintiff’s career certificate issued on April 7, 2016 is indicated as the revocation of the Plaintiff’s qualification for the president of the general child care center and less than 40 children’s career.]

According to Article 39 of the Administrative Litigation Act regarding the defendant's argument regarding the prior defense of the merits, the party's lawsuit shall be the defendant of the State, public organizations, and other subjects of rights, and according to Article 22 (1) of the Infant Care Act, the child care center is the principal.