1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The grounds for this part of the disposition are stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except in the following cases where the court uses or deletes the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 4

The portion of “Plaintiff B (Representative of H Child Care Center)” shall be deleted from 37 training courses, including the Tolin 2-14 Act, conducted from August 23, 2012 to March 7, 2014.

The three to four pages shall be put in the following table:

Plaintiff

After education of less than 921,410 won (7,462,036 won) (7,462,036 won) for 31 courses, such as 921,410 won (7,462,036 won) for production of 1,626,260 won (4,562,279 won) for 20 courses, such as CTolfin 2-11 for 20 courses, such as 1,098,210 won (5,505,91 won) for 20 courses, such as 1,626,260 won (4,562,279 won), excluding the extinctive prescription of illegal receipt training courses and the part thereof, excluding the extinctive prescription of the training courses, the court shall set forth in four attached Table 4.

The following shall be added to 5 pages 1:

【3) On the other hand, on December 29, 2014, the prosecutor rendered a non-prosecution disposition on charges of violating the Subsidy Management Act by the Director of the I Child Care Center operated by the Plaintiff C (Evidence of Evidence).

A person shall be appointed.

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s assertion 1 did not properly verify the cause of the disposition by each Plaintiff on the basis of the criminal punishment against the F representative, etc., and concluded that the Plaintiff constitutes an appearance under a condition of less than 80% without any verification. Each of the instant dispositions were taken.

In addition, in a criminal judgment against the above F representative, etc., there was no intention for the plaintiffs in the payment of training expenses, and the director of the child care center operated by the plaintiff C was subject to a disposition that is not suspected after being investigated as a suspect, and in the case of the plaintiff A, it was not admitted to the investigation agency.

Nevertheless, the defendant.