logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2020.09.17 2020구합10104
시설폐쇄명령처분 등 취소청구
Text

The Defendant’s portion exceeding KRW 5,071,230 of the subsidy return order issued on October 16, 2019 against the Plaintiff is as follows.

Reasons

Details of the disposition

In addition, the Plaintiff is the operator of the Gwangju Mine-gu C Center located in the Gwangju Mine-gu (hereinafter “instant Center”).

On June 12, 2019, the Defendant conducted a special inspection at a regional child center around June 12, 2019. According to the result of the special inspection, on October 16, 2019, the Plaintiff fell under “in cases of obtaining subsidies by fraudulent or other illegal means - improper use of subsidies” and accordingly, indicated “1,111,590 won for suspension of business pursuant to the Child Welfare Act and subordinate statutes (Notice of Administrative Disposition)” as “1,304,452 won for meal service,” but the evidence No. 3 (Notice of Administrative Disposition) of “1,304,452 won for meal service expenses” as “1,304,61,640 won for operating expenses and KRW 3,761,640, and KRW 590 for 5,111,590 for the Plaintiff.” The evidence No. 2 (Advance notice of Disposition) appears to have stated “the aforementioned 1,349,950 won for meal service expenses,” as “the aforementioned 150 won for meal service expenses” (hereinafter “the aforementioned”).

On December 16, 2019, the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff each of the instant dispositions, including “the instant first disposition” and “the instant second disposition,” on the ground that it constitutes improper use of subsidies - which constitutes improper use of subsidies, pursuant to the Child Welfare Act and subordinate statutes (hereinafter “instant facility closure”) and “the instant second disposition,” on the ground that it constitutes improper use of subsidies.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, and each disposition of this case in which the plaintiff's ground of disposition as to the whole purport of the argument does not exist as follows, and is unlawful.

The Plaintiff is entitled to KRW 3,761,640 as operating expenses for the first disposition of this case.

arrow