logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.05.03 2018구단9037
과징금부과처분취소
Text

1. The Defendant’s imposition of a penalty surcharge of KRW 15,300,000 against the Plaintiff on July 22, 2018 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is the representative and the president who establishes and operates the C Child-Care Center in Ansan-si B (hereinafter “instant Child-Care Center”).

B. From September 1, 2017 to September 6, 2017, D, a child care teacher in charge of the instant child care center, was indicted with the Suwon District Court on December 29, 2017, on the charge that: (a) committed physical or emotional abuse on a total of ten occasions between September 1, 2017 and September 6, 2017 to the victims of the instant child care center; and (b) inflicted bodily or emotional harm on the victims referred to in the following table 7 and 10; and (c) was charged with the Defendant’s injury to the victims:

[2017 Highest 2517 Child Welfare Act (Child Abuse), Injury] EF E E E E E EG

C. On April 26, 2018, the above court found D guilty of all the charges charged against D, and sentenced D a suspended sentence of two years in October, and the above judgment became final and conclusive as it did not appeal both D and D.

On July 22, 2018, the Defendant imposed a penalty surcharge of KRW 15,30,000 in lieu of six months of the suspension of operation of a child care center (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the Plaintiff based on Article 45(1)4 of the Infant Care Act, on the ground that the said D, an infant care teacher affiliated with the instant child care center, committed child abuse against the students of the child care center (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

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

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant’s imposition of a penalty surcharge on the Plaintiff on the ground of child abuse committed by D, since the Plaintiff was not negligent in exercising due care and supervision required to prevent child abuse by D.

(b) The attached Form of relevant statutes is as follows.

C. According to Article 45(1)4 of the Infant Care Act, where the founder or operator of a child care center commits child abuse under Article 3(7) of the Child Welfare Act, he/she shall be ordered to suspend the operation of the child care center for a period not exceeding one year.

arrow